mm&m 


llaac  Flagg 
1843-1931 


i 


MANUAL 


OF 


GREEK    LITERATURE, 


THE   EARLIEST   AUTHENTIC   PERIODS  TO   THE  CLOSE   OF 
THE   BYZANTINE  ERA. 


BY 


CHARLES   ANTHON,  LL.D., 

PROFESSOR    OF   THE   GREEK   AND   LATIN   LANGUAGES   IN   COLUMBIA  COLLEGE, 
RECTOE   OF  THE   GRAMMAR   SCHOOL,  ETC.,  ETC. 


NEW    YORK: 

HARPER    &    BROTHERS,    PUBLISHERS, 

3-29    &.    33!     PEARL    STREET, 
FRANKLIN    SQUARE. 

1853. 


M300G35 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  fifty-three,  by 

HARPER  &  BROTHERS, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  Southern  District 
of  New  York. 


.  V  *:^ 

s>*  ">*"***        * 


PREFACE, 


A  COURSE  of  Lectures  on  Greek  Literature  is  one  of  the 
duties  connected  with  the  department  of  Ancient  Lan 
guages  in  Columbia  College,  and,  in  fulfilling  this  require 
ment,  the  author  of  the  present  work  has,  for  many  years 
past,  read  a  series  of  lectures  on  the  subject  to  the  senior 
classes  of  the  institution.  Each  of  these  lectures  being 
invariably  followed  by  a  written  examination,  on  the  plan 
pursued  in  foreign  universities,  and  the  student  being 
called  upon,  in  the  course  of  such  examination,  for  addi 
tional  information  obtained  by  private  reading,  a  difficulty 
has  long  been  felt  with  regard  to  the  proper  sources  whence 
this  information  was  to  be  derived.  The  principal  works 
on  the  history  of  Greek  Literature  are  not,  in  general,  of 
easy  access  to  American  students,  some  by  reason  of  the 
expense  connected  with  them,  but  by  far  the  greater  part 
from  their  being  written  in  foreign  languages  with  which 
few  of  our  youth  are  familiar.  To  obviate,  therefore,  in 
some  degree,  these  two  difficulties,  the  present  work  has 
been  prepared,  and,  should  it  meet  with  a  favorable  re 
ception,  it  will  be  followed  by  a  similar  manual  of  Roman 
Literature. 

The  introductory  portion  of  the  volume  commences  with 
a  brief  abstract  of  what  is  termed  Linguistic,  so  far  as  this 
has  a  bearing  on  the  Indo-European  chain  of  languages, 
to  which  the  Hellenic  tongue  belongs  ;  a  subject  natu 
rally  possessing  great  interest  for  the  young  student,  and 
well  calculated  to  impart  a  liberal  tone  to  academical  re 
searches.  In  preparing  this  part  of  the  work,  rich  mate- 


IV  PREFACE. 

rials  have  been  obtained  from  the  stores  of  German  eru 
dition,  and  others  of  no  less  value  from  the  productions  of 
Donaldson,  Prichard,  Winning,  and  Mure,  among  English 
scholars. 

The  main  work  itself  embraces  in  its  plan  the  whole 
range  of  Greek  Literature,  from  the  earliest  periods  down 
to  the  close  of  the  Byzantine  era,  and,  besides  a  brief  ac 
count  of  each  successive  stage  of  development  in  the  his 
tory  of  the  Grecian  mind,  will  be  found  to  contain  bio 
graphical  sketches  of  all  the  most  eminent  writers  who 
flourished  within  the  limits  just  mentioned.  To  the  list 
of  their  works  there  is  also  appended,  in  the  case  of  each 
writer,  a  condensed  account  of  the  principal  editions,  pre 
pared  from  the  best  bibliographical  sources,  and  which, 
though  necessarily  brief,  may  not  prove  without  its  value. 
A  rapid  survey  is  also  taken  of  the  different  schools  of 
Greek  philosophy,  of  the  medical  systems  of  Greece,  and 
likewise  of  the  advances  made  in  the  cultivation  of  the 
mathematical  sciences. 

The  earlier  part  of  the  work  is  based,  in  a  great  meas 
ure,  upon  the  admirable  history  of  Greek  Literature  by 
C.  0.  Miiller,  left  unfinished  at  his  death,  and  upon  the 
labors  of  Mure  and  Ihne,  from  the  latter  of  whom,  in  par 
ticular,  the  history  of  the  Homeric  controversy  has  chiefly 
been  drawn.  In  general,  the  language  and  arrangement 
of  these  writers  have  been  carefully  retained,  as  far  as  was 
compatible  with  the  system  of  condensation  required 
throughout  the  work.  The  biographical  sketches  are 
taken,  for  the  most  part,  from  the  excellent  Dictionary  of 
Greek  and  Roman  Biography,  edited  by  Dr.  Smith,  a  work 
the  high  price  of  which  places  it  almost  entirely  out  of  the 
reach  of  American  students.  It  is  but  fair,  however,  to 
state,  that,  in  giving  these  sketches,  additions  have  fre 
quently  been  made  from  other  sources,  and  not  a  few  er 
rors  have  been  corrected  in  matters  appertaining  to  chro 
nology  and  literary  history.  Valuable  materials  have  also 
been  obtained  from  Clinton,  Scholl,  Bernhardy,  Bode,  and 


PREFACE.  V 

many  others  of  the  most  eminent  European  scholars.  In 
deed,  the  main  object  of  the  author  has  been  to  give,  as 
far  as  possible,  a  complete  resume  of  the  History  of  Greek 
Literature,  and  he  presents  the  work  as  such  to  the  stu 
dents  of  his  own  country,  in  the  earnest  hope  that  it  may 
lead  them  to  a  more  intimate  acquaintance  with  that  noble 
field  of  mental  culture,  from  which  the  literature  of  the 
civilized  world  almost  exclusively  derives  its  origin. 

The  subject  of  Sacred  Literature  forms  no  part  of  the 
present  work,  and  only  a  few,  therefore,  of  the  ecclesiastic 
al  writers,  such  as  Justin  Martyr,  Clemens  of  Alexandrea, 
and  Origen,  have  been  briefly  mentioned  under  the  head 
of  the  Neo-Platonic  school. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  principal  works  from  which 
materials  have  been  obtained,  or  which  have  been  con 
sulted  in  the  preparation  of  the  present  work : 

1.  Bopp,  Vergleichende  Grammatik,  &c.,  Berlin,  4to,  1833,  &c. 

2.  "       Comparative  Grammar  of  the  Sanscrit,  Zend,  &c.,  translated 
by  Eastwick,  London,  3  vols.  8vo,  1845-50. 

3.  Pott,  Etymologische  Forschungen,  Lemgo,  2  vols.  8vo,  1833-36. 

4.  Marsh,  Horae  Pelasgicae,  Cambridge,  8vo,  1815. 

5.  Hug,  Die  Erfindung  der  Buchstabenschrift,  Ulm,  8vo,  1801. 

6.  Donaldson,  New  Cratylus,  London,  8vo,  2d  ed.,  1850. 

7.  Prichard,  Researches  into  the  Physical  History  of  Mankind,  Lon 

don,  5  vois.  8vo,  1841-7. 

8.  EichhofF,  Parallele  des  Langues  de  1'Europe  et  de  1'Inde,  Paris,  4to, 

1836. 

9.  Eichhoff,  Vergleichung  der  Sprachen,  &c.,  von  Kaltschmidt,  Leipzig, 

4to,  1840. 

10.  Chavee,  Lexiologie  Indo-Europeenne,  Paris,  8vo,  1849. 

11.  Winning,  Manual  of  Comparative  Philology,  London,  8vo,  1838. 

12.  Pictet,  De  PAffinite  des  Langues  Celtiques  avec  le  Sanscrit,  Paris, 

8vo,  1827. 

13.  Dankovszky,  Die  Griechen  als  Stamm-  und  Sprachverwandte  der 

Slawen,  Pressburg,  8vo,  1828. 

14.  Ahrens,  De  Linguae  Graecae  Dialectis,  Getting.,  2  vols.  8vo,  1839-43. 

15.  Prichard,  Eastern  Origin  of  the  Celtic  Nations,  Oxford,  8vo,  1831. 

16.  Dieffenbach,  Celtica,  Stuttgart,  2  vols.  8vo,  1839-40. 

17.  Pococke,  India  in  Greece,  London,  8vo,  1852. 

18.  Latham,  The  Germania  of  Tacitus,  with  Ethnological  dissertations 

and  notes,  London,  8vo,  1851. 


VI  PREFACE. 

19.  Fabricii,  Bibliotheca  Graeca,  Hamb.,  ed.  3,  14  vols.  4to,  1718-28. 

20.  "  "  "  "         ed.  Harless,  12  vols.  4to,  1790 
-1811. 

21.  Harless,  Brevior  Notitia  Literaturae  Grsecae,  Lips.,  12mo,  1812. 

22.  Vossius,  De  Historieis  Graecis,  ed.  Westermann,  Lips.,  8vo,  1838. 

23.  Miiller,  History  of  the  Literature  of  Ancient  Greece,  London,  2  vols. 

8vo,  1840-1. 

24.  Miiller,  Griechische  Literatur,  Breslau,  2  vols.  8vo,  1841. 

25.  Mure,  Critical  History  of  the  Language  and  Literature  of  Greece, 

London,  4  vols.  8vo,  1850-3. 

26.  Scholl,  Histoire  de  la  Literature  Grecque  Profane,  Paris,  8  vols.  8vo, 

1825. 

27.  Scholl,  Geschichte  der  Griechischen  Literatur,  &c.,  Berlin,  3  vols. 

8vo,  1828-30. 

28.  Bernhardy,  Grundriss  der  Griechischen  Literatur,  Halle,  2  vols.  8vo, 

1845-52. 

29.  Bode,  Dichtkunst  der  Hellenen,  Leipzig,  6  vols.  8vo,  1838-40. 

30.  Mohnike,  Geschichte  der  Lit.  der  Griechen  und  Romer,  Greifswald, 

8vo,  1813. 

31.  Smith,  Dictionary  of  Greek  and  Roman  Biography,  &c.,  London, 

3  vols.  8vo,  1843-9. 

32.  Grafenhan,  Geschichte  der  Klassischen  Philologie,  Bonn,  4  vols. 

8vo,  1843-50. 

33.  Roulez,  Manuel  de  1'Histoire  de  la  Lit.  Grecque,  Bruxelles,  8vo, 

1837. 

34.  Jouffroy,  Manuel  de  la  Literature  Ancienne,  Paris,  8vo,  1842. 

35.  Munk,  Geschichte  der  Griechischen  Literatur,  Berlin,  2  vols.  12mo, 

1849-50. 

36.  Tregder,  Handbuch  der  Gr.  und  Rom.  Literaturgeschichte,  Mar 

burg,  12mo,  1847. 

37.  Matthias,  Manual  of  the  History  of  Greek  and  Roman  Literature, 

Oxford,  12mo,  1841. 

38.  Pierron,  Histoire  de  la  Lit.  Grecque,  Paris,  12mo,  1850. 

39.  Talfourd,  History  of  Greek  Literature,  London,  8vo,  1850. 

40.  Matter,  Histoire  de  1'Ecole  d'Alexandrie,  Paris,  2  vols.  8vo,  2d  ed., 

1840-44. 

41.  Egger,  Histoire  de  la  Critique  chez  les  Grecs,  Paris,  8vo,  1849. 

42.  Brucker,  Historia  Critica  Philosophise,  Lipsiae,  6  vols.  4to,  1767. 

43.  Degerando,  Histoire  comparee  des  Systemes  de  Philosophic,  Paris, 

4  vols.  8vo,  1823. 

44.  Tennemann,  Grundriss  der  Geschichte  der  Philosophic,  Leipzig, 

8vo,  1829. 

45.  Tennemann,  Manual  of  Philosophy,  by  Morell,  London,  12mo,  1852. 

46.  Ritter,  History  of  Philosophy,  translated  by  Morrison,  Oxford  and 

London,  4  vols.  8vo,  1838-46. 

47.  Finlay,  Greece  under  the  Romans,  London,  8vo,  1844. 

48.  "       Mediaeval  Greece,  and  Trebizond,  London,  8vo,  1851. 

49.  Clinton,  Fasti  Hellenici,  Oxford,  3  vols.  4to,  1834-51. 


PREFACE.  VU 

50.  Clinton,  Epitome  of  the  Civil  and  Literary  Chronology  of  Greece, 

Oxford,  8vo,  1851. 

51.  Donaldson,  Theatre  of  the  Greeks,  London,  8vo,  6th  edition,  1849. 

52.  Wieseler,  Theatergebaude,  &c.,  bei  den  Griechen  und  Romern,  Get 

ting.,  4to,  1851. 

53.  Browne,  History  of  Classical  Literature,  London,  2  vols.  8vo,  1851. 

54.  Blackie,  On  Greek  Pronunciation,  Edinburgh,  8vo,  1852. 

55.  Grote,  History  of  Greece,  London,  10  vols.  8vo,  1846-52. 

56.  Thirlwall,  History  of  Greece,  London,  new  ed.,  8  vols.  8vo,  1845-52. 

CHARLES  ANTHON. 
Columbia  College,  April  5th,  1853. 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTORY    REMARKS 


CHAPTER  I. 

DIVISION   OP   THE    SUBJECT  .......................................    14 

CHAPTER  II. 

FIRST  OR  MYTHICAL  PERIOD.  -  THE  LINUS.  -  PAEANS.  -  THE  THRENUS  AND  HY- 
MENuEUS.  -  EARLY  BARDS.  -  ANCIENT  THRACIAN  MINSTRELS  ..........  15 

CHAPTER  III. 

SECOND    OR    POETICAL    PERIOD.  -  INTRODUCTORY   REMARKS  .............    24 

CHAPTER  IV. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  HOMER.  -  PERSONAL  HISTORY.  - 
PRODUCTIONS.  -  ILIAD.  -  ODYSSEY  ...............................  26 

CHAPTER  V. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  HOMERIC  CONTROVERSY.  -  WOLF'S 
ARGUMENTS.  -  ANSWERS  TO  WOLF'S  ARGUMENTS.  -  MULLER  ON  THE  UNITY 
OF  THE  ILIAD.  -  UNITY  OF  THE  ODYSSEY.  -  NITZSCH's  DIVISION  OF  THE 
ODYSSEY  ...................................................  31 

CHAPTER  VI. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  PROOF  FROM  INTERNAL  EVIDENCE 
THAT  THE  HOMERIC  POEMS  ARE  THE  WORK  OF  ONE  AUTHOR.  -  GENERAL 
SIMILARITY  OF  STYLE,  TASTE,  AND  FEELING.  -  CONSISTENCY  IN  THE  CHAR 

ACTERS  .....................................................  39 

CHAPTER  VII. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  HOMERIC  INTERPOLATIONS.  - 
RHAPSODISTS.  -  COLLECTION  OF  THE  HOMERIC  POEMS  ASCRIBED  TO  PISIS- 
TRATUS  ....................................................  44 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  GENERAL  SUMMARY  OF  THE  HO 
MERIC  QUESTION  .............................................  49 

CHAPTER  IX. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  HOMERIC  HYMNS  AND  MINOR 
POEMS  ..........................  .51 


X  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  X. 

SECOND   OR   POETICAL  PERiOD   CONTINUED. HISTORY  OF  THE   HOMERIC  POEMS 

ALEXANDREAN     GRAMMARIANS. ZENODOTUS. ARISTOPHANES.  ARIS- 

TARCHUS. EDITIONS    OF    HOMER Page  53 

CHAPTER  XL 

SECOND   OR   POETICAL   PERIOD   CONTINUED. CYCLIC   POETS. STASINUS. ARC- 

TINUS. LESCHES,  &C 57 

CHAPTER  XII. 

SECOND    OR   PGKTICAL   PERIOD   CONTINUED. HESIOD. — PRODUCTIONS  ASCRIBED 

TO    HIM. EDITIONS    OF    HESIOD 60 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

SECOND   OR   POETICAL    PERIOD   CONTINUED. MISCELLANEOUS   EPIC    POETRY  OF 

THIS    PERIOD. CIN^ETHON. EUMELUS. ANTIMACHUS. ASIUS. PISANDER. 

EPIMENIDES. ARISTEAS 66 

CHAPTER  XIV. 

SECOND    OR    POETICAL    PERIOD    CONTINUED. LYRIC    POETRY. INTRODUCTORY 

REMARKS. ELEGIAC    VERSE. CALLINUS. TYRT^EUS. ARCHILOCHUS. Sl- 

MONIDES     OF.  AMORGUS. MIMNERMUS. SOLON. THEOGNIS. PHOCYLIDES. 

XENOPHANES. SIMONIDES    OF   CEOS. EPIGRAM. GREEK    ANTHOLOGY    69 

CHAPTER  XV. 

SECOND    OR     POETICAL     PERIOD     CONTINUED. LYRIC    POETRY    CONTINUED. 

IAMBIC  VERSE. ARCHILOCHUS. SIMONIDES   OF  AMORGUS. SOLON. HIPPO- 

NAX. ANANIUS. FABLE    AND    PARODY. JESOP. BABRIUS 85 

CHAPTER  XVI. 

SECOND   OR  POETICAL  PERIOD   CONTINUED. LYRIC -POETRY  CONTINUED. CON 
NECTION    OF    LYRIC    POETRY   WITH   MUSIC. TERPANDER. OLYMPUS. THA- 

LETAS 93 

CHAPTER  XVII. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD   CONTINUED. LYRIC  POETRY  CONTINUED. 

SCHOOLS  OF  LYRIC  POETRY. ORDERS  AND  OCCASIONS  OF  LYRIC  PERFORM 
ANCE. HYMN.—  NOME. HYPORCHEM. DITHYRAMB. SCOLIA. MILITARY 

MUSIC 97 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

SECOND    OR   POETICAL    PERIOD    CONTINUED. LYRIC    POETRY  CONTINUED. PO 
ETS    OF    THE    .ffiOLIC    SCHOOL. ALC^EUS. SAPPHO. ERINNA. ANACREON. 

ODES    FALSELY    ASCRIBED    TO    ANACREON 106 

CHAPTER  XIX. 

SECOND    OR    POETICAL    PERIOD   CONTINUED. LYRIC    POETRY  CONTINUED. PO 
ETS   OF  THE  DORIAN  CHORAL  SCHOOL. ALCMAN. STESICHORUS. ARION. 

1BYCUS. SIMONIDES   OF    CEOS. BACCHYLIDES. TIMOCREON. PINDAR    115 


CONTENTS.  XI 

CHAPTER  XX. 

THIRD     OR     EARLY     PROSAIC     PERIOD. INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS. EARLIER 

GREEK  PHILOSOPHY. PHERECYDES  OF   SYROS. THALES. ANAXIMANDER. 

ANAXIMENES. HERACLITUS. AN AXAGORAS. DIOGENES    APOLLONIATES. 

ARCHELAUS. XENOPHANES. — PARMENIDES. ZENO  OF  ELEA. EMPEDOCLES. 

PYTHAGORAS. EARLIER    GREEK    HISTORIANS. CADMUS    OF    MILETUS. 

ACUSILAUS. HECAT^EUS. PHERECYDES    OF    LEROS. CHARON. HELLANI- 

CUS. XANTHUS. LOGOGRAPHERS Page   129 

CHAPTER  XXI. 

THIRD    OR    EARLY    PROSAIC     PERIOD    CONTINUED. HERODOTUS. BIOGRAPHY 

OF  HERODOTUS. TRAVELS. ABSTRACT  OF  HIS  WORK. ITS  GENERAL  CHAR 
ACTER. EDITIONS 147 

CHAPTER  XXII. 

FOURTH    OR   ATTIC   PERIOD. INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS. THE   DRAMA. ORIGIN 

OF     TRAGEDY. ORIGIN    OF    THE     SATYRIC     DRAMA. REPRESENTATION    OF 

GREEK    PLAYS 155 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 

FOURTH    OR    ATTIC    PERIOD    CONTINUED. GREEK    TRAGEDIANS. CHCERILUS. 

PHRYNICHUS. PRATINAS. AESCHYLUS. STYLE    AND     MANNER    OF    -32SCHY- 

LUS. IMPROVEMENTS  INTRODUCED  BY  HIM. NUMBER  OF  PLAYS. EDI 
TIONS 174 

CHAPTER  XXIV. 

FOURTH    OR    ATTIC    PERIOD    CONTINUED. GREEK    TRAGEDIANS    CONTINUED.— 

SOPHOCLES. CHARACTER  OF  HIS  PRODUCTIONS. IMPROVEMENTS  INTRO 
DUCED  BY  HIM. NUMBER  OF  PLAYS. EDITIONS. EURIPIDES. CHARAC 
TER  OF  HIS  PLAYS. NUMBER  OF  PLAYS. EDITIONS 183 

CHAPTER  XXV. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD  CONTINUED. THE  OTHER  TRAGIC  POETS. NE 
OPHRON.— ION. ARISTARCHUS. ACH^US. CARCINUS. AGATHON. EU- 

PHORION. PHILOCLES.— ASTYDAMAS. IOPHON. YOUNGER    SOPHOCLES. 

YOUNGER    EURIPIDES. CH^REMON. THEODECTES 193 

CHAPTER  XXVI. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD  CONTINUED. GREEK  COMEDY. SUSARION. SI 
CILIAN  COMEDY. CHIONIDES. MAGNES. DIVISION  OF  COMEDY. OLD  COM 
EDY. ITS  GENERAL  CHARACTER. MIDDLE  COMEDY. NEW  COMEDY  .  200 

CHAPTER  XXVII. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD  CONTINUED.— POETS  OF  THE  OLD  COMEDY.— CRA- 
TINUS.— CRATES.— HEGEMON.— PHRYNICHUS.— EUPOLIS.— ARISTOPHANES.— 
CHARACTER  OF^  THE  COMEDIES  OF  ARISTOPHANES.— MERITS  AS  A  WRITER. 
—NUMBER  OF  PLAYS.  —  EDITIONS.  —  PHERECRATES.  —PLATO.  —  PHILONI- 

DES .   208 


Xll  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD  CONTINUED. DIGRESSION  RESPECTING  THE  SI 
CILIAN  COMEDY. WRITERS  OF  SICILIAN  COMEDY. PHORMIS. EPICHAR- 

MUS. — DINOLOCHUS. — sopHRON Page  217 

CHAPTER  XXIX. 

FOURTH    OR    ATTIC    PERIOD    CONTINUED. WRITERS    OF    THE    MIDDLE    COMEDY. 

EUBULUS. ARAROS. ANAXANDRIDES. ANTIPHANES. NICOSTRATUS. 

ALEXIS 220 

CHAPTER  XXX. 

FOURTH    OR   ATTIC    PERIOD    CONTINUED. WRITERS    OF    THE    NEW    COMEDY. 

PHILIPPIDES. PHILEMON. MENANDER. DIPHILUS. POSIDIPPUS. APOL- 

LODORUS 222 

CHAPTER  XXXI. 

FOURTH    OR    ATTIC    PERIOD     CONTINUED. OTHER    POETS    OF    THIS    PERIOD. 

ELEGIAC    POETRY. ION    OF    CHIOS. DIONYSIUS    OF    ATHENS. EUENUS    OF 

PAROS. CRITIAS    OF   ATHENS. ANTIMACHUS    OF    CLAROS. EPIC    POETRY. 

PANYASIS. CHCERILUS 227 

CHAPTER  XXXII. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD  CONTINUED. PROSE  WRITINGS. SCHOOL  OF  HIS 
TORY. THUCYDIDES. WRITINGS. CHARACTER  OF  HIS  WORK. — EDITIONS. 

XENOPHON. HISTORICAL  WORKS   OF    XENOPHON. DIDACTIC  WORKS. PHIL 
OSOPHICAL    WORKS. EDITIONS. CTESIAS. PHIHSTUS.  —  THEOPOMPUS. 

EPHORUS. HISTORIANS    OF    ALEXANDER    THE    GREAT. ANAXIMENES. CAL- 

LISTHENES. — CLITARCHUS. PTOLEMJEUS. ARISTOBULUS. ONESICRITUS. 

NEARCHUS. CHARES. EPHIPPUS. MARSYAS. ANDROSTHENES. MEDIUS. 

EUMENES. DIODOTUS 231 

CHAPTER  XXXIII. 

FOURTH    OR    ATTIC    PERIOD    CONTINUED. GEOGRAPHICAL   WRITERS. HANNO. 

SCYLAX. PYTHEAS 259 

CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD  CONTINUED. SCHOOL  OF  ELOQUENCE. INTRO 
DUCTORY  REMARKS. HISTORY  OF  ELOQUENCE  AMONG  THE  GREEKS. PER 
ICLES. CORAX. TISIAS. GORGIAS. — ATTIC  ORATORS. ANTIPHON. AN- 

DOCIDES. LYSIAS. ISOCRATES. IS^US. ^ESCHINES.  —  LYCURGUS. DE 
MOSTHENES. — HYPERIDES. DINARCHUS 263 

CHAPTER  XXXV. 

FOURTH    OR    ATTIC    PERIOD   CONTINUED. SCHOOL     OF    PHILOSOPHY. ATOMIC 

SCHOOL. LEUCIPPUS. DEMOCRITUS. SOPHISTIC     SCHOOL. GORGIAS. 

SOCRATIC    SCHOOL. SOCRATES. ^SCHINES. SIMON. CEBES. CYRENAIC 

SCHOOL. ARISTIPPUS. MEGARIC    SCHOOL. EUCLIDES. STILPON. ELIAC 

AND     ERETRIAC     SCHOOL. MENEDEMUS. ACADEMIC     SCH*OOL. PLATO. 

WRITINGS    OF    PLATO. PHILOSOPHY    OF    PLATO. POLITICAL    THEORIES    OF 


CONTENTS.  Xlll 

PLATO. EDITIONS    OF   PLATO. SPEUSIPPUS. XENOCRATES. POLEMO. 

CYNIC  SCHOOL. ANTISTHENES. DIOGENES. PERIPATETIC  SCHOOL. AR 
ISTOTLE. THEORETICAL  PHILOSOPHY  OF  ARISTOTLE. PRACTICAL  PHILOS 
OPHY  OF  ARISTOTLE. WORKS  ON  ART  BY  ARISTOTLE. LEADING  FEATURES 

OF  ARISTOTELIAN  PHILOSOPHY. EDITIONS  OF  ARISTOTLE. THEOPHRASTUS. 

STRATON. STOIC  SCHOOL. ZENO. CLEANTHES. CHRYSIPPUS. SKEP 
TICAL  OR  PYRRHONIC  SCHOOL. PYRRHO. TIMON. EPICUREAN  SCHOOL. 

EPICURUS. — METRODORUS Page  294 

CHAPTER  XXXVI. 

FOURTH    OR    ATTIC    PERIOD    CONTINUED. MATHEMATICS    AND    ASTRONOMY. 

HIPPOCRATES    OF    CHIOS. THEODORUS. METON. ARCHYTAS. EUDOXUS. 

MEDICINE. AESCULAPIUS. — HIPPOCRATES    OF   COS 351 

CHAPTER  XXXVII. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD. INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS. ALEXANDRINE 

CANON. ALEXANDRINE  SCHOOL. PERGAMUS. TARSUS 359 

CHAPTER  XXXVIII. 

FIFTH    OR    ALEXANDRINE    PERIOD    CONTINUED. POETRY. EPIC    POETRY. 

KHIANUS. APOLLONIUS    RHODIUS. EUPHORION. DIDACTIC    EPOS. ARA- 

TU8. NICANDER. DIDACTIC  POETS  NOT  EPIC. APOLLODORUS. SCYMNUS. 

LYRIC    POETRY. PHILETAS. HERMESIANAX. PHANOCLES. CALLIMA- 

CHUS. MELIC    POETRY. BUCOLIC    POETRY. THEOCRITUS. BION. — MOS- 

CHUS. DRAMATIC  POETRY. ALEXANDER  ^ETOLUS. PHILISCUS. SOSITHE- 

U8. LYCOPHRON. RHINTHON 363 

CHAPTER  XXXIX. 

FIFTH    OR    ALEXANDRINE    PERIOD    CONTINUED. PROSE    COMPOSITION. HIS 
TORY.  HECAT^EUS. BEROSUS. ABYDENUS. MANETHO. DIOCLES. TI- 

M^EUS. ARATUS. PHYLARCHUS. ISTER. POLYBIUS. CHARACTER    OF 

HIS    HISTORY. EDITIONS. APOLLODORUS 394 

CHAPTER  XL. 

FIFTH    OR    ALEXANDRINE    PERIOD    CONTINUED. GEOGRAPHICAL    WRITERS. 

DIC^ARCHUS. MEGASTHENES. DAIMACHUS. TIMOSTHENES. ERATOS 
THENES. POLEMO 397 

CHAPTER  XLI. 

FIFTH   OR   ALEXANDRINE   PERIOD   CONTINUED. PHILOSOPHY. MIDDLE   ACAD 
EMY. ARCESILAUS. NEW  ACADEMY. CARNEADES. CLITOMACHUS. PHI- 

LO. ANTIOCHUS. STOIC    SCHOOL. DIOGENES    THE    BABYLONIAN. PAN- 

JETWS. POSIDONIUS 403 

CHAPTER  XLII. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD  CONTINUED. ELOQUENCE. ASIATIC  STYLE 

OF  ORATORY. — DKMETRIUS  PHALEREUS ,.  409 


XIV  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  XLIII. 

FIFTH     OR    ALEXANDRINE    PERIOD    CONTINUED. GRAMMATICAL     SCIENCE. 

GRAMMARIANS. ZENODOTUS. ARISTOPHANES     OF    BYZANTIUM. ARISTAR- 

CHUS. AMMONIUS. DEMETRIUS. PAMPHILUS. DIONYSIUS    THRAX.  — 

CRATES. ARTEMIDORUS. SOSIBIUS. PAL^EPHATUS. DIDYMUS.  Page  410 

CHAPTER  XLIV. 

FIFTH   OR   ALEXANDRINE    PERIOD    CONTINUED. MATHEMATICS. — EUCLIDES. 

ARCHIMEDES. WORKS    OF    ARCHIMEDES. EDITIONS. APOLLONIUS    PER- 

G^EUS. WORKS. EDITIONS. ASTRONOMY. CONON. ARISTARCHUS    OF 

SAMOS. ERATOSTHENES. HIPPARCHUS. MECHANICIANS. — CTESIBIUS. 

HERON. ATHEN^EUS. BITON. PHILO 419 

CHAPTER  XLV. 

FIFTH     OR     ALEXANDRINE    PERIOD    CONTINUED. MEDICAL    SCIENCE. — DOG- 

MATICI. DIOCLES     OF    CARYSTUS. PRAXAGORAS.  —  HEROPHILUS. ERASIS- 

TRATUS. EMPIRICI. — PHILINUS. SERAPION. HERACLIDES 435 

CHAPTER  XLVI. 

SIXTH    OR    ROMAN    PERIOD. INTRODUCTORY   REMARKS. POETRY. EPIGRAM. 

ANTIPATER. MELEAGER,  &C. DIDACTIC  POETRY. DIONYSIUS  PERIEGE- 

TES. OPPIANUS. MARCELLUS    SIDETES. EPIC    POETRY. QUINTUS    SMYR- 

N^EUS. PROSE.  —  HISTORIANS. CASTOR. THEOPHANES. TIMAGENES. — 

JUBA. DIODORUS    SICULUS. DIONYSIUS    OF    HALICARNASSUS. NICOLAUS 

DAMASCENUS.  MEMNON. PAMPHILA. JOSEPHUS. PLUTARCH. ARRIAN. 

APPIAN. DION    CASSIUS. HERODIAN. .ELIAN. DEXIPPUS. PHLEGON. 

AFRICANUS 439 

CHAPTER  XL VII. 

SIXTH    OR    ROMAN    PERIOD   CONTINUED. SOPHISTS    AND   RHETORICIANS. IN 
TRODUCTORY    REMARKS. SOPHISTS. LESBONAX. DION    CHRYSOSTOM. 

POLEMON. HERODES    ATTICUS. ADRIANUS. ARISTIDES. LUCIAN. MAX- 

IMUS  TYRIUS. PHILOSTRATUS. RHETORICIANS. DIONYSIUS  OF  HALICAR 
NASSUS. HERMOGENES. APHTHONIUS. LONGINUS. APSINES. WRIT 
ERS  OF  WORKS  OF  FICTION. CLEARCHUS. ANTONIUS  DIOGENES. LU 
CIUS  OF  PATR^E. IAMBLICHUS. XENOPHON  EPHESIUS. ALCIPHRON. 

GRAMMARIANS,  LEXICOGRAPHERS,  AND    SCHOLIASTS 471 

CHAPTER  XLVIII. 

SIXTH   OR  ROMAN  PERIOD   CONTINUED. PHILOSOPHERS. INTRODUCTORY  RE 
MARKS. EPICUREAN    SCHOOL. CELSUS. STOIC    SCHOOL. EPICTETUS. 

ANTONINUS. PERIPATETIC      SCHOOL. NEW     PYTHAGOREAN     SCHOOL. 

ECLECTIC    ACADEMICS. SKEPTICISM    OF    THE    EMPIRIC    SCHOOL. NEO-PLA- 

TONISTS. PHILO     JUD^EUS. NUMENIUS. JUSTIN      MARTYR. CLEMENS 

ALEXANDRINUS. ORIGEN. AMMONIUS     SACCAS. PLOTINUS. PORPHYRI- 

US. IAMBLICHUS. PROCLUS. PHILOSOPHY     OF     THE     FATHERS     OF     THE 

CHURCH _    501 


CONTENTS.  XV 

CHAPTER  XLIX. 

SIXTH  OR  ROMAN  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  MATHEMATICIANS.  -  ANATOLIUS.  - 
THEODOSIUS.  -  MENELAUS.  -  HYPSICLES.  -  PTOLEIMUEUS.  -  PRODUCTIONS  OF 
PTOLEM^EUS.  -  EDITIONS.  -  WRITERS  ON  MILITARY  TACTICS  AND  KINDRED 
SUBJECTS.  -  ONOSANDER.  -  APOLLODORUS.  -  ARRIAN.  -  ^LIANUS  TACTICUS. 

-  POLY^ENUS.  -  WRITERS    ON    MUSIC.  -  ALYPIUS.  -  GAUDENTIUS.  -  PTOLE- 
M^EUS.  -  ARISTIDES    QUINTILIANUS  .........................    Page  518 

CHAPTER  L. 

SIXTH    OR    ROMAN    PERIOD    CONTINUED.  -  GEOGRAPHICAL    WRITERS.  -  STRABO. 

-  CHARACTER   OF   HIS   WORK.  -  EDITIONS.  -  ISIDORUS   OF   CHARAX.  -  PAUSAN- 
IAS.  -  MARINUS    OF   TYRE.  -  PTOLEM^EUS  .........................    525 

CHAPTER  LI. 

SIXTH  OR  ROMAN  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  MEDICAL  WRITEite..  -  ASCLEPIADES  OF 
BITHYNIA.  -1—  DIOSCORIDES.  -  THEMISON.  -  THESSALUS.  -  SORANUS.  -  ARE- 
T^EUS.  -  GALENUS.  -  CHARACTER  OF  HIS  WORKS.^-  EDITIONS.  -  ALEXANDER 
APHRODISIENSIS.  -  ALEXANDER  TRALLIANUS.  -  ARTEMIDORUS  ........  529 

CHAPTER  LIT. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD.  -  INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS  .........  53G 

CHAPTER  LIU. 

SEVENTH    OR   BYZANTINE    PERIOD   CONTINUED.  -  POETRY.  -  EPIGRAM.  -  JULIAN. 

-  APOLLINARIUS.  -  PALLADAS.  -  PAULUS  SILENTIARIUS.  -  AGATHIAS.—  OTHER 
DEPARTMENTS    OF    POETRY.  -  NONNUS.  -  MUS^EUS.  -  COLUTHUS.  -  TRYPHIO- 
DORUS.  -  PAULUS    SILENTIARIUS.  -  GEORGIUS    PISIDES.  -  CONSTANTINE    PSEL- 
LUS.  -  THEODORUS    PRODROMUS.  -  JOANNES    TZETZES.  -  MANUEL    PHILES.  - 
JOANNES    PEDIASMUS  .......................................     .     537 

CHAPTER  LIV. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  PROSE.  -  SOPHISTS,  &C.  _  UL- 
P1ANUS.  -  THEMISTIUS.  -  LIBANIUS.  -  HIMERIUS.  -  JULIANUS.  -  PRO^ERESIUS. 

-  BASILIUS  ............................................  _     541 

CHAPTER  LV. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  WRITERS  OF  WORKS  OF  FIC 
TION.  -  HELIODORUS.  -  ACHILLES  TATIUS.  -  LONGUS.  -  CHARITON.  _  EU- 


STATHIUS 


CHAPTER  LVI. 

SEVENTH     OR    BYZANTINE     PERIOD     CONTINUED.  —  GRAMMARIANS.  —  CECUMEN- 

lcs  .......................................................   548 

CHAPTER  LVII. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD  CONTINUED.  -  SCHOLIASTS  AND  COMMENTA 
TORS.  -  SYRIANUS.  -  EUSTATHIUS.  -  ISAAC  AND  JOHN  TZETZES.  -  DEMETRIUS 
TRICLINIUS  .....................................  _  550 


XVI  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  LVIII. 

SEVENTH    OR    BYZANTINE    PERIOD    CONTINUED. LEXICOGRAPHERS. H  iRPO- 

CRATION. AMMONIUS    GRAMMATICUS. HESYCHIUS. PHILEMON. PHOTIUS. 

ZONARAS. SUIDAS. WRITERS   ON   DIALECT. GREGORIUS    CORINTHU8    OR 

PARDUS. THOMAS    MAGISTER. GEORGIUS    LECAPENUS. AUTHORS    OF    BIB 
LIOGRAPHICAL    AND    OTHER    COLLECTIONS. PHOTIUS. EUDOCIA.    Page  551 

CHAPTER  LIX. 

SEVENTH    OR    BYZANTINE    PERIOD    CONTINUED. HISTORIANS. EUSEBIUS.  — 

PRAXAGORAS. EUNAPIUS. OLYMPIODORUS. ZOSIMUS. BYZANTINE   HISTO 
RIANS. JOANNES    ZONARAS. NICETAS    ACOMINATUS. NICEPHORUS    GREGO- 

RAS. LAONICUS,   OR    NICOLAUS,    CHALCONDYLES. PROCOPIUS. AGATHIAS. 

MENANDER. JOANNES    OF    EPIPHANEA. THEOPHYLACTUS    SIMOCATTA. 

JOANNES    OF    JERUSALEM. THEODOSIUS. CONSTANTINUS    VI.,   PORPHYRO- 

GENITUS. GENESIUS. LEONTIUS. JOANNES     CAMENIATA. LEO    DIACO- 

NUS. MICHAEL    CONSTANTINE    PSELLUS. NICEPHORUS    BRYENNIUS. ANNA 

COMNENA. JOANNES    CINNAMUS. GEORGIUS    ACROPOLITA. GEORGIUS    PA- 

CHYMERES. JOANNES    CANTACUZENUS. JOANNES    DUCAS. JOANNES    ANA- 

GNOSTES. JOANNES    CANANUS. GEORGIUS    PHRANZA. GENERAL    CHRONI 
CLERS. GEORGIUS    SYNCELLUS. THEOPHANES    ISAACIUS. JOANNES    MALA- 

LAS. JOANNES    SCYLITZES. LEO   GRAMMATICUS. GEORGIUS   MONACHUS. 

CHRONICON    PASCHALE. GEORGIUS    HAMARTOLUS. NICEPHORUS. JULIUS 

POLLUX. GEORGIUS   CEDRENUS. SIMEON  METAPHRASTES. HIPPOLYTUS. 

MICHAEL    GLYKAS. CONSTANTINE    MANASSES. EPHR^EMIUS. JOEL. THE 
ODOSIUS. HESYCHIUS    OF    MILETUS. WRITERS    ON    STATISTICS,   POLITICS, 

ANTIQUITIES,    &C. — 'PROCOPIUS. JOANNES    LYDUS. HIEROCLES. THEO 
PHYLACTUS. ALEXIS    I.,    COMNENUS. MATTH^US    BLASTARES. GEORGIUS 

CODINUS. MANUEL    PAL-iEOLOGUS 557 

CHAPTER  LX. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD  CONTINUED. GEOGRAPHERS. MARCIANUS. 

STEPHANUS  OF  BYZANTIUM. COSMAS  INDICOPLEUSTES 566 

CHAPTER  LXI. 

SEVENTH    OR    BYZANTINE    PERIOD   CONTINUED. MATHEMATICIANS. DIOPHAN- 

TUS. PAPPUS. THEON. HYPATIA. HERON    THE    YOUNGER 568 

CHAPTER  LXII. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD  CONTINUED. COMPILERS. JOANNES  STO- 

B^EUS. CASSIANUS  BASSUS. GEOPONICA 570 

CHAPTER  LXIII. 

SEVENTH    OR    BYZANTINE    PERIOD    CONCLUDED. MEDICAL    WRITERS. ORIBA- 

SIUS. AETIUS. ALEXANDER    TRALLIANUS. PAULUS    JEGINETA. THEOPHI- 

LDS    PROTOSPATHARIUS 571 


HISTORY 

OF 

GREEK  LITERATURE. 


INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS.1 

I.  THE  Greek  language  forms  a  branch  of  the  great  family  of  lan 
guages,  known  by  the  name  of  the  Indo-Germanic,  and  extending  from 
India  to  the  British  Isles. 

II.  Some  writers,2  in  speaking  of  this  chain  of  languages,  prefer  the 
appellation  Indo-European;  but  the  term. Indo-Germanic  is  decidedly  pref 
erable,  since  it  points  at  once  to  the  two  most  important  branches  of  the 
family,  namely,  the  Indian  and  Teutonic  languages,  and  is  also  free  from 
the  vagueness  which  attaches  itself  to  the  name  Indo-European ;  for 
there  are  languages  in  Europe  which  have  no  established  affinity  with 
this  family.3 

III.  The  languages  included  under  the  title  of  Indo-Germanic  are  the 
following:  1.  The  Sanscrit*  and  its  derivative  dialects.     2.  The  Zend,* 

1  Donaldson's  New  Cratylus,  2d  ed.,  p.  108,  seqq.;  Penny  Cyclopaedia,  vol.  xi,  p.  427, 
seqq.;  Mutter,  History  of  Greek  Literature,  p.  3,  seqq.;  Winning's  Manual  of  Comparative 
Philology,  p.  20,  seqq. ;  Mure,  Critical  History  of  the  Language  and  Literature  of  Greece, 
vol.  i.,  p.  87,  seqq.;  St.  John,  The  Hellenes,  vol.  i.,  p.  3,  seqq.;  Bernhardy,  Grundriss  der 
Griechischen  Literatur,  vol.  i.,  p.  160,  seqq.;  Browne,  History  of  Classical  Literature,  vol. 
i.,  p.  9,  seqq. 

2  Winning's  Manual,  &c.,  p.  20.     Compare  Prichard,  Eastern  Origin  of  the  Celtic  Na 
tions,  p.  17.  3  Donaidson,  New  Cratylus,  p.  108,  2d  ed. 

*  The  term  Sanscrit  is  an  epithet  employed  by  the  Brahmins  to  designate  the  language 
in  which  their  books  of  law  and  religion  are  written.  The  original  word  San-s-krita 
is  a  compound :  the  first  syllable  is  the  preposition  sam,  "  with"  (compare  the  Greek 
<rvv  and  a/xa) ;  the  second  is  the  passive  participle  krita,  of  the  verb  Jcrl,  "  to  make" 
(compare  the  Latin  cre-are,  and  the  Greek  /cpcuVto),  with  a  silent  s  interposed  between 
the  two.  Hence  Sanskrita  is  equivalent  to  the  Latin  confectus,  and  means  "  done,  made, 
or  formed  completely."  It  indicates,  therefore,  a  perfect,  highly-polished,  regularly  in 
flected  language,  one  possessing  all  its  flexions  and  grammatical  forms  ;  in  other  words, 

a  classical  language,  or  one  removed  from  the  corrupting  influences  of  every-day  use. 

New  Cratylus,  p.  121,  2d  ed. 

5  The  term  Zend  seems  to  be  the  ancient  Parsee  word  for  "book,"  and  to  have  been 
specially  applied  to  the  volume  of  Zoroaster's  sacred  writings,  in  the  same  way  as  we 
use  the  word  Bible  (Burnouf,  Comm.,  p.  16).  It  was  first  applied  by  Anquetil  to  the 
language  in  which  the  Scriptures  of  the  Parsees  are  written,  and  in  this  sense  it  has 
been  generally  adopted  throughout  Europe.  The  Zend  language  belongs  to  the  Median 
branch  of  the  Indo-Germanic  family  of  languages  (Penny  Cyclop.,  xxvii.,  p.  760).  Some 
writers  have  regarded  the  Zend  as  merely  a  dialect  of  the  Sanscrit,  but  this  is  evidently 
erroneous.  Consult  the  remarks  of  Donaldson,  New  Cratylus,  p.  126,  2d  ed. 

A 


,M,  i  V  E  R  A  T  u  R  E. 


and  the  other  ancient  dialects  of  Persia.  3.  The  Teutonic  languages, 
comprising  the  Gothic,  German,  Anglo-Saxon,  Icelandic,  Swedish,  &c. 
4.  The  Latin  and  Greek.  5.  The  Sclavonic  languages,  including  the  Lith 
uanian,  Prussian,  Polish,  Bohemian,  &c.  6.  The  Celtic  languages.1 

IV.  The  affinity  which  exists  between  all  the  languages  of  the  Indo- 
Germanic  family  is  evident,  not  merely  from  the  number  of  words  which 
are  common  to  them  all,  but  likewise  from  the  similarity  of  their  gram 
matical  forms.     The  same  words,  only  slightly  disguised,  are  used  in 
most  of  these  languages  for  the  pronouns,  the  numerals,  and  the  most 
simple  of  the  prepositions. 

V.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Indo-Germanic  languages  are  distinguished 
from  those  of  the  Semitic  family  (to  which  latter  class  the  Hebrew,  Syriac, 
Arabic,  Ethiopic,  and  other  kindred  tongues  belong)  by  a  different  mode 
of  inflection,  by  different  words  for  the  pronouns,  numerals,  and  preposi 
tions,  and  by  the  power  of  forming  compound  words,  which  are  not  found, 
with  the  exception  of  a  few  instances,  in  the  Semitic  tongues.2 

VI.  While  the  Semitic  branch  occupies  the  southwest  of  Asia,  the  Indo- 
Germanic  languages  run  almost  in  a  straight  line  from  southeast  to  north 
west,  through  Asia  and  Europe.     A  slight  interruption,  however,  occurs 
in  the  case  of  the  latter  in  the  country  between  the  Euphrates  and  Asia 
Minor,  which  appears  to  have  been  occasioned  by  the  pressure  of  Semitic 
or  Syrian  races  from  the  south  ;  for  it  seems  probable  that  originally  the 
members  of  this  national  family  succeeded  one  another  in  a  continuous 
line  from  the  great  parent  source  or  home.3 

VII.  This  home  or  parent  source  of  the  Indo-Germanic  race  appears  to 
have  been  a  region  called  Iran,  bounded  on  the  north  by  the  Caspian,  on 
the  south  by  the  Indian  Ocean,  on  the  east  by  the  Indus,  and  on  the  west 
by  the  Euphrates.     Within  these  limits  were  spoken,  so  far  as  we  can 
discover,  two  languages,  which  bore  the  same  relation  to  one  another 
that  we  recognize  as  subsisting  between  Low  and  High  German,  a  lan 
guage  analogous  to  the  former  being  spoken  in  the  low  countries,  in  the 
north  and  east  of  the  district,  and  one  analogous  to  the  latter  in  the  more 
mountainous  regions  of  the  south.     The  southern  one  of  these  languages 
has  been  called  by  philologists  the  High  Iranian,  the  northern  and  eastern 
the  Low  Iranian.* 

VIII.  The  surrounding  nations  to  the  north  and  east  belonged  to  the 
Turanian  or  Sporadic  family,  who  appear  to  have  scattered  themselves 
over  Europe  long  before  the  great  Indo-Germanic  migration  commenced, 
and  to  have  been  either  conquered  by  the  latter  races  in  their  subsequent 
onward  progress,  or  to  have  been  driven  by  them  to  the  mountainous 
extremities  of  the  continent  of  Europe.5 

1  On  the  claims  of  the  Celtic  to  a  place  among  the  Indo-Germanic  languages,  consult 
Prichard,  Eastern  Origin  of  the  Celtic  Nations,  Oxford,  1831,  and  Pictet,  De  VAffinite  dps 
Langues  Celtiques  avec  le  Sanscrit,  Paris,  1837.  2  Penny  Cyclopaedia,  xi.,  p.  428. 

3  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  4.  *  Donaldson,  Neio  Cratyltis,  p.  117,  2d  ed. 

5  By  the  term  "Turanian,"  which  has  been  borrowed  from  the  old  Persian  legends 
of  Iran  and  Turan,  countries  engaged  from  the  earliest  times  in  perpetual  enmities, 
modern  writers  designate  all  the  tribes  to  the  north  of  Iran,  or,  in  other  words,  the  races 
to  the  northward  of  the  Oxiis  and  the  range  of  Imaus.  Among  these,  the 


INTRODUCTION.  O 

IX.  When  the  mighty  people  confined  within  the  comparatively  narrow 
limits  of  Iran  had  become  too  numerous  for  the  country  they  lived  in, 
the  eastern  and  northern  tribes  sent  off  emigrations  to  the  southeast  and 
northwest,  breaking  through  or  driving  before  them  the  tribes  by  which 
they  w^ere  hemmed  in.     Those,  however,  who  went  off  to  the  northwest 
were  more  powerful  or  more  enterprising  than  the  emigrants  who  took 
a  southeasterly  course ;  for  while  the  former  carried  the  Low  Iranian 
dialect  over  all  Asia  and  Europe  to  the  islands  of  the  West,  the  latter 
mastered  only  the  northern  part  of  Hindostan,  and  perhaps  also,  to  a  cer 
tain  extent,  a  few  of  the  islands  of  the  Polynesia.1 

X.  Although  we  have  no  good  reason  to  doubt  the  great  antiquity  of 
the  Sanscrit  language,  and  though  the  writings  in  which  it  is  contained 
are  the  modern  representatives  of  a  school  of  epic  and  didactic  poetry, 
probably  older  than  the  earliest  specimens  of  Greek  literature,  we  must 
not  suppose  that  it  was  as  we  have  it  now,  the  same  old  Iranian  idiom 
which  was  taken  into  Europe ;  on  the  contrary,  it  bears  evident  marks 
of  those  changes  which  long  usage  introduces  into  every  language,  and 
which  have  not  operated  to  so  great  an  extent  in  some  of  the  sister 
tongues  of  Europe,  for  instance,  in  the  Low  German,  the  Latin,  and  the 
Greek.     However,  as  we  do  not  possess  any  memorials  of  the  primeval 
language  from  which  it  sprung,  and  as  it  does  present  most  remarkable 
correspondences  with  the  oldest  European  languages  of  the  Indo-Ger- 
manic  family,  we  must  be  content  to  take  it  as  the  representative  of  the 
old  Low  Iranian.2 

XL  If  we  consider  the  elements  of  the  population  of  Europe,  accord 
ing  to  the  order  in  which  they  were  successively  added  to  the  first  sprink 
ling  of  scattered  Turanian  tribes  that  had  preceded  them,  we  can  hardly 
fail  to  arrive  at  the  following  results.  The  first  emigrants  from  Asia 
were  the  sons  of  Gomer — Celts  and  Cimmerians — who  entered  the  con 
tinent  of  Europe  from  the  steppes  of  the  Caucasus,  and,  passing  round 
the  northern  coasts  of  the  Black  Sea,  not  only  spread  over  the  whole  ot 
Europe,  especially  to  the  south  and  west,  but  also  recrossed  into  Asia 
by  the  Hellespont,  and  conquered  or  colonized  the  countries  bordering 
on  the  southern  shore  of  the  Euxine.3 

XII.  The  next  invaders  were  the  sons  of  Magog  —  Sarmatians  or 
Sclavonians — who  are  generally  found  by  the  side  of  the  Celts  in  the 
earliest  settlements.  They  more  fully  occupied  the  east  of  Europe  ;  but 
though  they  largely  contributed  to  the  population  of  Greece  and  Italy, 
they  do  not  appear  to  have  spread  beyond  the  Oder  in  the  North,  or  to 
have  established  themselves  permanently  in  the  Alps,  or  in  the  middle 
highlands  of  Germany.  The  Sclavonian  is  the  most  widely-extended 
idiom  of  the  Indo-Germanic  family.  It  is  spread  over  a  wide  surface  of 


Scythians,  or  Mongoles  and  Kalmuks,  are  particularly  meant.  The  Finns  and  the  Es 
quimaux  also  belong  to  this  great  division,  and  it  has  been  supposed  that  a  Finnish 
population  was  spread  over  Europe  when  the  great  Celtic  immigration  commenced. 
Compare  Prichard,  Researches  into  the  Physical  History  of  Mankind,  vol.  i.,  p.  257,  seqq. 

1  Donaldson,  New  Cratylus,  p.  117,  2d  ed.  2  Id.  ib.,  p.  124. 

3  Id.  ib.,  p.  108. 


GREEK    LITERATURE. 

Europe  and  Asia,  from  the  Pacific  to  the  Baltic,  from  the  Adriatic  to  the 
Arctic  Sea.1 

XIII.  Next  in  order  after  the  Sclavonians  came  the  Teutonic  races, 
consisting,  first,  of  the  Low  Germans,  who,  starting  from  the  regions  be 
tween  the  Oxus  and  the  laxartes,  burst  through  the  Sclavonians,  and 
finally  settled  themselves  in  the  northwest  of  Europe ;  and,  secondly, 
of  the  High  Germans,  who  subsequently  occupied  the  higher  central  re 
gions.     The  High  Germans,  like  the  High  Iranians,  we  so  name  from 
their  inhabiting  the  mountainous  districts  of  the  south ;  and  the  Low 
Germans  from  their  occupying  the  low  countries  toward  the  north.2 

XIV.  The  people  whom  we  call  Greeks,  from  the  Latin  appellation 
Greed,  but  who  styled  themselves  Hellenes  ("EAATjyes),3  were  not  the  ear 
liest  inhabitants  of  the  country  which  bore  their  name  (Gratia,  'E\\ds). 
Various  tribes  are  said  to  have  occupied  the  land  previous  to  the  arrival 
of  the  Hellenic  race,  the  most  celebrated  among  which  was  that  of  the 
Pelasgi  (UeXacryoi),  although  some  writers  are  of  opinion  that  all  these 
tribes  were  connected  together,  and  merely  formed  so  many  parts  of  one 
great  Pelasgic  race.4 

XV.  Who  the  Pelasgi  were  must  ever  remain  a  matter  of  uncertainty.5 
Even  the  Greeks  themselves  appear  to  have  had  no  definite  information 
on  the  subject.     Some  accounts  represent  them  as  little  better  than  mere 
savages,  strangers  even  to  the  simplest  arts  of  life,  and  to  the  first  nec 
essaries  of  civilized  society,  ignorant  even  of  fire  ;  while  other  legends 
made  them,  in  the  very  earliest  period  of  their  settlement  in  Greece,  to 
have  already  reached  a  comparatively  high  stage  of  social  refinement. 
These  latter  accounts  assigned  unto  them  tillage  and  the  useful  arts  as 
their  proper  and  original  pursuits.     We  are  told  that  they  loved  to  set 
tle  on  the  rich  soil  of  alluvial  plains,  that  they  built  towns  which  they  for 
tified  with  walls  of  a  colossal  size,  and  zealously  worshipped  the  pow- 

1  Donaldson,  New  Cratylus,  p.  113.     Compare  Schafarik,  Slavische  Alterthumer,  vol.  i., 
p.  33,  seqq. 

2  Donaldson,  1.  c.    Compare  Mannert,  Geschichte  dor  alten  Deutschen,  p.  4,  seqq. ;  Men- 
zel,  Gesch.  der  Deutschen,  p.  5. 

3  The  name  "EAArjve?  is  supposed  to  mean  "  warriors."     Compare  Miiller's  note  on  the 
Doric  form  'ATreAAwi'  for  'ATroAAox/  (Dorians,  ii.,  6,  6).     Some,  however,  on  the  authority 
of  Aristotle  (Meteorol.,  i.,  14),  find  a  relation  between  the  "EAAijj/e?  and  the  SeAAot  of  Do- 
dona,  called  'EAAcu  by  Pindar,  the  sanctuary  of  Dodona  having  itself  been  termed  Hella. 
Compare  Nieluhr,  Rom.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  47,  note  143. 

*  This  latter  is  the  true  opinion.  Niebuhr  asserts,  not  as  a  mere  hypothesis,  but  as 
a  matter,  with  him,  of  historical  conviction,  that  there  was  a  time  when  the  Pelasgi, 
then,  perhaps,  more  widely  spread  than  any  other  people  in  Europe,  extended  over  Italy 
and  Greece,  from  the  Po  and  Arno  to  the  Bosporus  (Rom.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  52).  The  re 
marks  of  Grote  on  this  assertion  of  Niebuhr  are  exceedingly  nippant  and  unfair  (Hist, 
of  Greece,  vol.  ii.,  p.  347,  note). 

5  The  derivation  of  the  name  rieAaayoi  from  ne\apyoi,  "  storks,"  in  allusion  to  their 
migratory  habits,  quoted  by  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus  (i.,  28)  from  Myrsilus  of  Les 
bos,  is  simply  absurd.  Some  modern  attempts  at  etymology  are  not  much  better.  Roth 
(Gesch.  dbendland.  Philos.)  makes  the  term  one  of  Phrenician  origin,  Plashi,  "the  wan 
derer,"  while  Donaldson,  on  the  other  hand,  makes  IleA-cKrj/o?  (following  the  analogy  of 
ne'A-o<J/,  "swarthy  of  face")  mean  "the  swarthy  Asgian,  or  Asiatic"  (Varronianus,  p. 
24.  Compare  Philolog.  Mus.,  ii.,  p.  353).  On  the  subject  of  the  Pelasgi  generally,  con 
sult  Lepsius,  Ueber  die  Tyrrhen.  Pelasger ;  Annali  delV  Inst.  Archaeol.,  1836,  p.  186. 


INTRODUCTION.  O 

ers  of  heaven  and  earth,  who  made  their  fields  fruitful  and  their  cat 
tle  prolific.1 

XVI.  The  language  spoken  by  the  ancient  Pelasgi  is  described  by  one 
of  the  Greek  writers  as  a  barbarous  tongue,  that  is,  not  Hellenic  ;2  and 
this  opinion  has  also  been  adopted  by  several  modern  inquirers.     It  ap 
pears  exceedingly  improbable,  however,  if  the  Pelasgic  and  Hellenic  lan 
guages  had  either  no  relation  to  each  other,  or  else  only  a  very  slight 
one,  that  these  two  tongues  should  have  so  readily  amalgamated  in  all 
parts  of  Greece ;  and  still  more  strange  that  the  Athenians  and  Arca 
dians,  who  are  admitted  to  have  been  of  pure  Pelasgic  origin,  should 
have  both  lost  their  original  language,  and  learned  the  pure  Hellenic 
tongue.     It  is  reasonable,  therefore,  to  suppose  that  the  Pelasgic  and  Hel 
lenic  languages  were  different  dialects  of  one  common  tongue,  and  formed 
by  their  union  the  Greek  language  of  later  times.3 

XVII.  But,  what  is  of  most  importance  with  regard  to  the  Pelasgian 
language,  it  appears  that  the  old  inhabitants  of  Italy  were  also  Pelasgi, 
and  there  is  certainly  no  radical  difference  between  the  Latin  and  the 
Greek.     It  is  probable,  therefore,  that  the  Pelasgic  and  Hellenic  tongues 
resembled  each  other  as  much  as  the  Swedish  and  German,  or  the  Span 
ish  and  Italian.     In  each  of  these  cases  the  difference  is  such  as  to  con 
stitute,  in  the  familiar  sense,  the  one  a  foreign  tongue  as  compared  with 
the  other,  although  in  each  the  critical  inquirer  discovers  a  close  affinity.* 

XVIII.  It  has  already  been  stated  that  the  origin  of  the  Pelasgic  race 
is  involved  in  utter  uncertainty.     Some  modern  scholars,  however,  think 
it  probable  that  they  were  a  Low  Iranian  people,  and  a  branch  of  the 
great  Sclavonic  nation  ;5  and  what  has  been  regarded  as  a  strong  argu 
ment  in  favor  of  this  opinion  has  been  drawn  from  the  striking  agreement 
of  even  the  modern  Sclavonic  with  the  Latin,  and  also  with  the  oldest 
element  of  Greek.6 

XIX.  The  additional  or  Hellenic  element  of  the  Greek,  which  after 
ward  pervaded  the  whole  language,  and  gave  a  High  German  character 
to  its  entire  structure,  seems  to  have  come  from  the  East  by  the  way  of 
Asia  Minor ;  at  any  rate,  we  find  that  the  Hellenes  make  their  first  his 
torical  appearance  in  the  south  of  Thessaly,  or  the  northeastern  part  of 

1  Herod.,  ii.,  52  ;  Guigniaut,  Religions  de  I'Antiquite,  vol.  ii.,  pt.  i.,  p.  289,  note  ;  Mutter, 
Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  8 ;  Thirlwall,  Hist,  of  Greece,  vol.  i.,  p.  38,  seqq.,  ed.  1845 ;  St.  John, 
Hellenes,  vol.  i.,  p.  12.  2  Herod.,  i.,  55. 

3  Donaldson,  New  Cratylus,  p.  128.  Compare  the  remark  ofNiebuhr  :  "The  farther 
we  look  back  into  antiquity,  the  richer,  the  more  distinct,  and  the  more  broadly  marked 
do  we  find  the  dialects  of  great  languages.  They  subsist,  one  beside  the  other,  with 
the  same  character  of  originality,  and  just  as  if  they  were  different  tongues"  (Hist.  Rom., 
vol.  i.,  p.  54).  *  Donaldson,  New  Crat.,  p.  129.  5  Id.  ib. 

6  The  resemblance  of  the  Russian  to  the  Latin  is  said  to  be  so  striking,  that  a  modern 
traveller  has  not  hesitated  to  assert  that  the  founders  of  Rome  spoke  the  Russian  lan 
guage  !  (Italy  and  its  Inhabitants,  by  J.  A.  Galiffe,  of  Geneva,  vol.  i.,  p.  356,  seqq.).  The 
student  may  consult  the  two  following  works  on  the  affinity  between  the  early  Greek 
and  the  Sclavonic.  "  Homerus  Slavicis  dialectis  cognata  lingua  scripsit :  ex  ipsius  Ho- 
meri  Carmine  ostendit  Gregorius  Dankovsky,"  Vindob.,  1829  ;  and  "  Der  Griechen  als 
Stamm-  und  Sprachverwandte  der  Slaven.  Historisch  und  Philologisch  dargestellt,  von  Gre- 
gor.  Dankovsky,"  Pressburg,  1828. 


GREEK    LITERATURE. 

Greece.  Aristotle,  indeed,  makes  the  original  seat  of  the  Hellenic  race 
to  have  been  near  Dodona,  in  Epirus,  but  on  what  authority  he  gives 
this  statement  we  do  not  know.1  The  general  feeling  of  the  Greeks, 
however,  was  different,  connecting  the  Hellenes,  primarily  and  specially, 
with  the  territory  called  Achaia  Phthiotis,  between  Mounts  Othrys  and 
(Eta.  The  region  here  meant  was  first  called  Hellas,  a  name  extended 
afterward  to  the  whole  of  Greece.2 

XX.  This  new  or  Hellenic  element  is  supposed  by  some  eminent  mod 
ern  scholars  to  have  been  High  Iranian  or  Persian.3     The  striking  resem 
blance  between  the  High  German,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  ancient 
Greek  and  modern  Persian  on  the  other,  was  pointed  out  in  the  infancy 
of  comparative  philology.4     The  resemblance  which  the  Greek  bore  to 
the  Persian,  in  particular,  must  have  been  much  greater  formerly ;  so 
much  so,  indeed,  that  a  Greek  could  learn  Persian  without  any  difficulty, 
as  appears  from  the  examples  of  Democedes  and  Themistocles,  the  for 
mer  of  whom  made  a  witty  remark  in  Persian  before  he  had  been  long 
at  Susa  ;5  while  the  latter,  an  elderly  man,  who  had  never  learned  a  for 
eign  tongue  in  his  life,  made  himself  a  proficient  in  the  language  within 
a  year.6 

XXI.  In  accordance  with  the  usual  method  pursued  by  the  Greeks,  of 
inventing  names  to  account  for  the  origin  of  nations,  the  Hellenes  are 
said  to  have  descended  from  Hellen,  the  son  of  Deucalion.     Hellen  had 
three  sons,  Dorus,  Xuthus,  and  ^Eolus  ;  and  Xuthus,  again,  had  two  sons, 
Achaeus  and  Ion.     From  Dorus,  ^Eolus,  Achaeus,  and  Ion,  the  Dorians, 
^Eolians,  Achseans,  and  lonians  were  said  to  have  descended,  who  formed 
the  four  great  tribes  into  which  the  Hellenic  nation  was  for  many  centu 
ries  divided. 

XXII.  According,  however,  to  the  ingenious  and  more  satisfactory 
explanation  of  some  modern  scholars,  the  name  Hellenes,  as  already  re 
marked,7  means  "the  warriors;"  the  Dorians  (Aapiels)  are  "Highland 
ers,"  from  8a  and  opos ;  the  JEolians  (KloXels)  are  "  the  mixed  men,"  from 
al6\os,  "  varied,"  a  name  which  arose  when  the  Dorians  first  descended 
from  their  mountains  in  the  region  of  Thessaly,  and  incorporated  them 
selves  with  the  Pelasgi  of  the  Thessalian  plains.     So,  again,  the  lonians 
("laves)  are  "  the  men  of  the  coast,"  from  yiovia,  or  yidv,  "  the  coast  or 
shore,"  called  also  Aiyux\cis,  or  " Beachmen,"  from  alyia\6s,  "the  beach," 
and  the  'A^atoi  are  "  seamen,"  from  a  root  in  the  Greek  language  answer 
ing  to  the  Latin  aqua.6 

XXIII.  It  is  a  curious  fact,  noticed  by  some  modern  scholars,  that  the 
Grecian  race  which  made  the  earliest  and  most  rapid  progress  in  civili 
zation  and  intellectual  attainments  was  the  one  in  which  the  Pelasgian 

1  Aristot.,  Meteorol,  i.,  14. 

2  Grote,  Hist,  of  Greece,  vol.  ii.,  p.  356.    Aristotle  very  probably  alludes  to  the  first  Hel 
lenic  settlement  in  the  land,  after  which  they  may  have  moved  south  into  Thessaly,  and 
then  first  became  known  to  history.  3  Donaldson,  New  Cratylus,  p.  131. 

4  Lipsii  Epist.  Henrico  Schottio,  Op.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  41,  seqq.,  Cent,  iii.,  ed.  1614  ;  Salmas., 
He  Ling.  Hellen,,  p.  331,  seqq.  5  Herod.,  iii.,  130. 

6  Plut.,  Themist.,  c.  29.  7  pagc  ^  notc  3 

8  Kcnrick,  Phil.  Mus.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  367  ;  Donaldson,  New  Cratylus,  p.  134. 


INTRODUCTION.  / 

blood  was  least  adulterated  by  foreign  admixture,  namely,  the  lonians  of 
Attica  and  of  the  settlements  in  Asia ;  and  that  we  probably  owe  to  the 
Pelasgic  element  in  the  population  of  Greece  all  that  distinguishes  the 
Greeks  in  the  history  of  the  human  mind.  The  Dorians,  on  the  other 
hand,  who  were  the  most  strictly  Hellenic,  long  disdained  to  apply  them 
selves  to  literature  and  the  fine  arts.1 

XXIV.  Before  proceeding  farther,  however,  one  point  naturally  remains 
to  be  settled,  namely,  why  the  Hellenes  were  known  to  the  Romans  only 
under  the  appellation  of  Graci  or  Graii.    The  best  solution  of  the  difficul 
ty  appears  to  be,  that  the  early  Pelasgian  colonists  of  central  Italy  were 
the  Gr&ci  or  Graii,  who  retained  in  their  transmarine  possessions  their 
early  name,  which  became  obsolete  in  the  mother  country.     Hence  may 
be  explained  the  practice  so  inveterate  with  the  Latin  poets,  from  Ennius 
downward,  of  calling  the  Greeks,  even  of  the  purely  Hellenic  age,  Pelas- 
gians,  while  the  name  Hellenes  rarely,  if  ever,  occurs  in  their  text  in  its 
generic  sense.2 

XXV.  During  the  century  subsequent  to  the  fall  of  Troy  (1184  B.C.), 
extensive  changes  took  place  in  the  dialectical  as  well  as  political  rela 
tions  of  the  Hellenic  states.    About  sixty  years  after  that  event  (1124  B.C.), 
dissensions  among  the  Molic  tribes  in  northern  and  central  Greece  pro 
duced  a  large  emigration  from  Boeotia,  and  the  neighboring  districts,  to  the 
conquered  coasts  and  islands  of  Asia  Minor,  already  partially  occupied  by 
the  sons  or  followers  of  the  victorious  chiefs.     As  the  colonists  were 
chiefly  of  ^Eolian  race,  the  expedition  bears  the  familiar  name  of  JEolian, 
and  the  region  occupied  that  of  JEolis.     About  twenty  years  afterward, 
the  Peloponnesus  was  overrun  by  the  Dorians  (1104  B.C.).     This  cata 
strophe  was  followed,  at  some  interval  (1044  B.C.),  by  a  similar  settlement 
of  the  greater  part  of  the  ejected  population  of  the  peninsula  on  the  Asiatic 
coast,  to  the  south  of  the  district  possessed  by  their  ./Eolian  kinsmen. 
Through  these  convulsions,  the  ties,  social  and  political,  which  had  previ 
ously  united  the  Hellenic  nation,  were  in  a  great  measure  dissolved,  and 
the  subsequent  wider  separation  of  domicile  and  interests  interposed  seri 
ous  obstacles  to  their  renewal.3 

XXVI.  From  this  period,  accordingly,  may  be  dated  the  more  specific 
distinction  of  dialects,  which  becomes  so  important  in  the  subsequent 
stages  of  Greek  literary  culture.     The  Hellenic  tongue,  prior  to  that  dis 
tinction,  might  be  divided  into  two  comprehensive  varieties ;  first,  the 
Ionic,  indigenous  in  the  more  civilized  states,  namely,  Attica,  the  low 
lands  of  the  Peloponnesus,  and  probably  other  coasts  and  islands  subject 
to  or  politically  connected  with  these  provinces  ;  and,  secondly,  the  Molic, 
in  the  wider  sense,  embracing  the  whole  remaining  body  of  less  cultivated 
dialects.4 

XXVII.  That  the  Ionic  originally  comprised  secondary  forms  of  dia- 

i  Maiden,  Hist,  of  Rome,  p.  70. 

-  Compare  Niebuhr,  Hist  of  Rome,  vol.  i.,  p.  56,  note  162. 

3  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  107.     Compare  Tfurlwall,  Hist.  Gr.,  vol.  i.,  p.  282,  seqq. ; 
Grote,  Hist.  Gr.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  434,  seqq. ;  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  vol.  i.,  p.  107,  seqq. 

4  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,vo],  i.,  p.  108. 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 

lect,  as  the  JEolic  did,  may  be  inferred  from  the  account  given  by  Herodo 
tus  of  those  prevalent  in  his  own  time  among  the  lonians  of  Asia.  We 
possess,  however,  no  positive  knowledge  either  from  traditional  or  literary 
sources,  of  these  particular  varieties.  The  old  Epic  dialect,  or,  as  it  is 
also  called,  the  old  poetical  Ionic,  which  was  carried  to  perfection  by 
Homer,  exhibits  the  efforts  of  a  nation  pre-eminently  gifted  with  poetical 
and  musical  genius,  and  as  yet  neither  aided  nor  shackled  by  grammatical 
refinements,  to  embody  its  conceptions  in  the  most  expressive  and  har 
monious  forms.  That  this  branch  of  the  Ionic  is,  in  a  great  degree,  of 
poetical  formation,  its  own  internal  evidence  betrays.  Many  of  its  char 
acteristic  features  originate  in  a  tendency  to  adapt  the  structure  of  words 
to  the  exigencies  of  hexameter  verse,  the  earliest,  and,  for  a  long  time, 
the  only  measure  in  which  the  Greek  poets  are  known  to  have  composed.1 

XXVIII.  Under  the  name  JEolic  the  Greek  grammarians  included  dia 
lects  very  different  from  one  another,  as  in  later  times  every  thing  was 
comprehended  under  that  term  which  was  not  Doric,  Ionic,  or  Attic.    Ac 
cording  to  this  acceptation  of  the  name,  about  three  fourths  of  the  Greek 
nation  consisted  of  Cohans,  and  dialects  were  classed  together  as  JEolic, 
which,  as  is  evident  from  the  more  ancient  inscriptions,  differed  more 
from  one  another  than  from  the  Doric ;  as,  for  example,  the  Thessalian 
and  JEtolian,  the  Boeotian  and  Elean  dialects.     The  three  most  marked 
and  distinguished  varieties  of  the  JEolic  dialect  were  the  Lesbian,  the 
Thessalian,  and  the  Boeotian  ;2  the  Thessalian  forming  a  mean  between  the 
other  two.    A  modern  scholar3  has  shown,  in  fact,  that  the  ancient  gram 
matical  critics  are  accustomed  to  affirm  peculiarities  as  belonging  to  the 
JEolic  dialect  generally,  which  in  truth  belong  only  to  the  Lesbian  variety 
of  it,  or  to  the  poems  of  Alcaeus  and  Sappho,  which  those  critics  attentive 
ly  studied.    Lesbian  JEolic,  Thessalian  JEolic,  and  Boeotian  JEolic,  are  all 
different ;  and  if,  abstracting  from  these  differences,  we  confine  our  atten 
tion  to  that  which  is  common  to  all  three,  we  shall  find  little  to  distin 
guish  this  abstract  JEolic  from  the  abstract  Doric,  or  that  which  is  com 
mon  to  the  many  varieties  of  the  Doric  dialect.4 

XXIX.  On  the  whole,  it  may  be  said  of  the  JEolic  dialect,  that  it  bears 
an  archaic  character,  and  approaches  nearest  to  the  sources  of  the  Greek 
language.     Hence  the  Latin,  as  being  closely  connected  with  the  most 
ancient  Greek,  has  a  strong  affinity  with  it,  and,  in  general,  the  agreement 
with  the  other  languages  of  the  Indo-Germanic  family  is  almost  always 
perceptible  in  JEolic.     It  is  distinguished  from  the  Doric,  as  already  re 
marked,  by  trifling  differences  ;  chiefly,  however,  by  the  so-called  JEolic 
digamma.5 

XXX.  The  superiority  of  the  Lesbian  JEolic  to  the  other  branches  of 
that  dialect  may  be  accounted  for  as  follows :  The  colonists  of  Lesbos, 
and  of  the  neighboring  JEolian  coast,  united  with  the  taste  for  sensual  en 
joyment,  common  to  their  Ionian  neighbors,  a  peculiar  fervor  and  excita 
bility  of  temperament.     There  sprung  up,  accordingly,  afnong  them  a 

1  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  112.  2  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  9. 

3  Ahrens,  De  Dial.  JEol,  f)  51 .  «  Grote,  Hist,  of  Greece,  vol.  ii.,  p.  448 

*  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  10. 


INTRODUCTION.  9 

school  of  lyric  poetry,  pre-eminent  above  all  others  in  impassioned  com 
position,  especially  that  of  the  amatory  or  voluptuous  order. ~-  The  adap 
tation  of  their  language  to  such  subjects  actually  involved  a  refinement 
of  the  old  rustic  features  which  it  retained  in  the  mother  country.  This 
was  effected  with  little  sacrifice  of  its  native  simplicity,  partly  by  soften 
ing  down  its  ruder  asperities,  and  partly  by  an  infusion  of  more  liquid 
forms  from  the  Homeric  fountain-head  of  pure  poetical  idiom.1 

XXXI.  In  Attica,  the  ancient  population,  with  its  pure  Ionic  idiom,  re 
mained  undisturbed  by  any  political  movements  from  without.     In  the 
Peloponnesus,  however,  the  change  of  inhabitants,  consequent  upon  the 
Dorian  invasion,  was  accompanied  by  a  corresponding  revolution  of  dia 
lects.     A  remnant  of  the  old  Achaean  population  kept  its  ground  on  the 
narrow  strip  of  territory  between  the  Corinthian  Gulf  and  the  Cyllenian 
Mountains ;  and  some  other  petty  tribes  of  lonians  here  and  there,  sub 
mitting  to  the  conquerors,  retained  their  possessions  in  a  state  of  vassal 
age.     But  the  language  and  habits  of  the  subdued  race  became,  in  later 
times,  more  or  less  assimilated  to  those  of  the  dominant  states.    Elis,  on 
the  eastern  coast,  was  assigned  to  a  body  of  JEtolian  adventurers,  who 
had  joined  the  Dorian  armament  on  its  passage  through  their  country. 
As,  however,  the  previous  dialect  of  both  ^Etolia  and  Elis  was  ^Eolic,  no 
essential  change  was  here  produced.    The  Arcadian  mountaineers,  more 
over,  preserved,  together  with  their  independence,  their  proper  ^Eolian 
tongue,  which,  itself  closely  allied  to  that  of  their  new  Dorian  neighbors, 
had  not  participated  in  the  culture  of  the  expelled  tribes.2     The  districts 
immediately  occupied  by  the  Dorians  were  Argolis,  Laconia,  and  Messenia. 
In  the  sequel,  however,  their  conquests,  with  their  language,  were  grad 
ually  extended  over  Corinthia  and  Megaris  to  the  Attic  frontier,  and  sub 
sequently,  by  settlers  from  Epidaurus,  to  the  neighboring  island  of  JEgina..3 

XXXII.  The  peculiarities  by  which  the  Doric  dialect  was  distinguished 
from  the  other  varieties  of  the  Greek  language,  are  to  be  attributed  to  the 
mountain  life  of  the  Dorians  in  their  earliest  settlements.     We  always 
find  a  tendency  to  the  formation  of  broad  vowel  sounds  in  the  language 
of  mountaineers,  and  this  fondness  for  the  a  and  a,  which  letters  the 
Dorians  generally  used  where  ij  and  ov  were  employed  in  other  dialects, 
and  also  their  aversion  to  sibilants,  is  analogous  to  what  we  frequently 
observe  in  the  languages  which  are  spoken  by  both  Highlanders  and  Low- 
landers.    The  use  of  the  article,  also,  in  the  Greek  language  is  attributed 
to  the  Dorians,  the  poetry  of  Alcman  having  first  introduced  it  into  the 
literature  of  Greece,  the  older  language,  like  the  Latin,  being  entirely 
without  it.*. 

XXXIII.  The  Doric  dialect  was  rudest  among  the  Spartans,  the  ene 
mies  of  all  change.     It  was  spoken  in  the  greatest  purity  by  the  Messe- 

*  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  116.  2  Strab.,  p.  333.     Compare  Herod.,  viii.,  73. 
3  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  110. 

*  Muller,  Dorians,  vol.  ii.,  p.  488  ;  Penny  Cyclop.,  vol.  ix.,  p.  90  ;  Matthias,  G.  G.,  vol.  i., 
p.  5 ;  Ahrens,  De  Dial.  Dor.,  p.  395,  seqq.    Muller  has  given  a  very  full  account  of  the 
Doric  dialect,  in  Appendix  viii.  to  his  work  on  the  Dorians  (vol.  ii.,  p.  484,  seqq.),  which 
is  well  worthy  of  perusal.     But  he  carries  the  Doric  peculiarities  too  far,  and  makes  too 
wide  a  distinction  between  Doric  and  JEolic. 


10  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

nians.  The  grammarians  notice  two  epochs  in  it,  according  to  which  they 
divide  it  into  the  old  and  new  Doric  dialects.  In  the  old,  the  comic  poet 
Epicharmus,  and  Sophron,  author  of  the  Mimes,  were  the  principal  writ 
ers.  In  the  new,  which  approached  nearer  the  softness  of  the  Ionic,  the 
chief  writer  is  Theocritus.  Besides  these,  the  first  Pythagorean  philos 
ophers  wrote  in  Doric. 

XXXIV.  The  ejected  inhabitants  of  the  Peloponnesus  first  sought  refuge 
among  their  Ionian  kinsmen  of  Attica.     Afterward,  however,  under  the 
auspices  of  Athenian  leaders,  they  crossed  the  JEgean,  and  occupied  the 
coast  of  Asia,  southward  from  the  yEolian  settlements,  as  far  as  the  head 
land  of  Miletus,  together  with  the  adjacent  islands  of  Chios  and  Samos. 
Here  they  appear  in  later  times,  under  the  distinctive  name  of  lonians. 
Their  subsequent  celebrity  under  this  title,  and  the  still  greater  celebrity 
of  the  metropolitan  state  of  Athens  on  the  opposite  continent,  caused  the 
appellation  of  Ionian,  in  after  ages,  to  be  so  exclusively  restricted  to  the 
colonies,  that  the  terms  Athenian  and  Ionian,  or  Attic  and  Ionic,  instead  of 
being  identical,  as  with  Homer,  were  henceforward  pointedly  distinct. 
The  southwestern  extremity  of  the  same  Asiatic  coast,  with  the  adjacent 
islands,  was  afterward  occupied,  in  like  manner,  by  Dorian  settlements.1 

XXXV.  During  the  long  separation  of  interests  between  the  two  great 
bodies  of  the  same  Ionian  race,  consequent  on  the  Dorian  revolution,  the 
previous  common  dialect  was  subjected  in  each  to  other  changes,  offering 
an  interesting  analogy  to  those  in  their  national  character.    In  the  Asiatic 
colonies  many  causes  conspired,  not  only  to  soften  the  ferocity  of  the  old 
heroic  spirit,  but  also  to  diminish  the  sense  of  political  independence,  and 
to  promote  effeminate  habits.     The  enervating  influence  of  Oriental  lux 
ury,  with  which  they  were  brought  into  closer  contact,  was  aided  by  a  se 
ductive  climate,  increase  of  commerce  and  wealth,  and  by  their  position 
in  regard  to  the  powerful  nations  of  the  interior,  whose  favor  they  were 
under  the  frequent  necessity  of  courting,  and  toward  whom  they  latterly 
stood  on  the  footing  of  vassal  to  liege  lord.    Hence  the  new  or  later  Ionic 
became  the  softest  of  the  dialects,  on  account  of  the  frequent  meeting  of 
vowels,  producing  a  liquidness  of  sound,  and  the  deficiency  of  aspirated 
letters.2 

XXXVI.  On  the  other  hand,  among  the  people  of  Attica,  or  the  Euro 
pean  descendants  of  the  Ionic  race,  opposite  causes  produced  as  opposite 
effects.     In  Athens,  with  a  less  rapid  advance  in  science  or  wealth,  a 
complete  political  independence  was  accompanied  by  greater  integrity  of 
manners.    The  importance  of  that  state,  as  a  member  of  the  old  national 
confederacy,  was  also  increased  by  the  rivalry  into  which  she  was  brought 
with  the  new  Dorian  dynasties.    It  was  under  these  circumstances,  there 
fore,  that  the  intellectual  powers  of  the  Athenians,  naturally  of  the  high 
est  order,  were  called  forth  ;  combining  acuteness  of  conception  with  fer 
tility  of  invention  and  purity  of  taste,  they  exhibit,  during  the  flourishing 
ages  of  the  republic,  all  the  proper  excellences  of  the  Hellenic  genius  in 
the  highest  perfection.    The  Attic  dialect,  accordingly,  offers  the  most  ex- 

1  Mure,  1.  c.  2  Mure,  Hist.  Crit.,  vol.  i.,  p.  11 


IiXTROi)  UCT1OIV. 


11 


cellent  model  of  a  language  lor  the  familiar  usage  of  social  life,  or  the 
more  practical  and  intellectual  branches  of  letters.1 

XXXVII.  As  the  varieties  of  dialect  were  met  by  a  corresponding  va 
riety  of  taste  or  talent,  certain  styles  of  composition  came  to  be  considered 
the  more  immediate  province  of  one  dialect  than  of  another.     The  Doric 
became  the  favorite  language  of  the  higher  branches  of  lyric  composition, 
and  of  the  primitive  schools  of  philosophy ;  the  ^Eolic  of  the  amatory  ode ; 
the  old  Ionic  retained  its  former  privilege  in  regard  to  the  epic  style  and 
hexameter  verse  ;  the  new  Ionic  for  a  long  time  was  the  favorite  dialect 
for  prose,  and  especially  historical  composition,  until  supplanted  by  the 
Attic,  which  last  also  was  regarded  as  the  model  in  one  particular  depart 
ment  of  poetry,  namely,  the  dramatic,  with  the  exception,  however,  of  the 
choruses  and  lyric  portions  generally,  in  which  a  species  of  Doric  pre 
dominates,  the  most  eminent  lyric  poets  having  written  in  the  Doric  dia 
lect.     Most  of  the  great  works  of  antiquity  which  have  been  transmitted 
to  our  times  are  written  in  the  Attic  dialect.2 

XXXVIII.  Some  writers  have  made  two,  and  some  three  divisions  of 
the  Attic  dialect,  with  reference  to  extant  writers ;  but  the  general  divi 
sion  of  the  Attic  dialect  into  old  and  new  seems  to  be  sufficiently  exact. 
To  the  former  division  belong  ^Eschylus,  Sophocles,  Euripides,  Antiphon, 
Thucydides,  &c. ;  to  the  latter,  Demosthenes,  ^Eschines,  and  the  contem 
porary  orators.     The  language  of  Xenophon,  Plato,  and  indeed  Aristoph 
anes  also,  may  be  considered  as  possessing  a  character  somewhat  inter 
mediate  between  the  two  classes,  and  the  name  of  middle  Attic  may  con 
sequently  be  given  to  it ;  but  it  would  be  difficult  to  say  exactly  how  a 
writer  of  this  middle  class  is  to  be  distinguished  from  the  writers  of  the 
new  Attic.3 

XXXIX.  After  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  when  the  Greeks  were 
more  united  as  a  nation,  the  superiority  of  Athenian  literature  made  the 
language  of  Athens  the  common  language  of  those  who  wrote  pure  Greek. 
Aristotle  may  be  regarded  as  the  earliest  extant  writer,  not  an  Athenian 
by  birth,  who  adopted  the  language  of  Athens.     The  Attic  dialect,  then 
somewhat  modified  under  Macedonian  influence  and  by  local  circum 
stances,  became  the  common  written  language  of  the  educated  Greeks. 
We  find,  accordingly,  under  the  successors  of  Alexander,  and  afterward 
under  the  Romans,  a  series  of  Greek  prose  writers,  belonging  to  various 
countries,  but  all  attempting  to  write  one  common  language.    This  com 
mon  language  of  the  learned  Greeks  was  called  the  common  dialect  (rj 
KOIV^,  or  77  'EAA^I/IKT/  5iaAe/cTos),  and  was  marked,  of  course,  by  numerous 
deviations  from  the  pure  old  Attic  standard.     Polybius,  a  native  of  the  Pel 
oponnesus  ;  Strabo,  of  Asia  Minor ;  Diodorus,  of  Sicily  ;  and  others,  be 
long  to  the  writers  who  use  the  common  dialect.* 

XL.  Poetry,  however,  was  not  written  in  this  common  dialect,  The 
peculiarities  of  the  Homeric  language  were  imitated  by  those  \vho  com 
posed  in  hexameters,  as  the  epic,  didactic,  and  elegiac ;  and  this  became 

'-  Mure,  Hist.  Crit.,  vol.  i.,  p.  115. 

-  Id.,  p.  121  ;  Buttmann,  G.  G.,  p.  4,  <s  110,  Robinson's  transl. 

n  Pfimy  Cyclop.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  62.  *  Ibid 


12  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

therefore,  just  as  the  Attic  for  prose,  the  prevailing  dialect  or  universal 
language  for  these  forms  of  poetry,  and  remained  current  even  in  the 
Alexandrine  and  later  ages,  when  it  was  no  longer  understood  by  the 
common  people,  but  a  learned  education  was  necessary  for  the  full  com 
prehending  and  enjoyment  of  such  poems.  The  most  celebrated  poets  of 
this  class  are,  in  the  Alexandrine  period,  Apollonius,  Callimachus,  Aratus ; 
and  later,  Nicander,  Oppian,  Quintus  Smyrnseus,1  &c. 

XLI.  In  the  mean  time  the  Doric  dialect  was  not  entirely  excluded  from 
poetry,  even  in  the  later  periods.  It  maintained  itself  in  some  of  the 
minor  species,  especially  in  rural  and  sportive  poems  ;  partly  because 
there  wrere  even  here  certain  earlier  models  ;  and  partly,  also,  because  in 
many  of  these  poems  it  was  essential  to  imitate  the  tone  and  language  of 
the  countryman  and  of  the  lower  classes,  whose  dialect  was  almost  every 
where  the  Doric,  in  consequence  of  the  very  general  spread  of  the  Doric 
tribe.  Hence  the  works  of  the  idyllic  writers,  Theocritus,  Bion,  and  Mos- 
chus,  are  Doric,  though  their  later  Doric  differs  much  from  that  of  Pindar.2 

XLII.  Out  of  the  common  language  arose  what  was  called  the  Alexan 
drine  dialect,  to  which  partial  allusion  has  already  been  made.  This  was 
the  common  dialect,  interspersed  with  peculiarities,  which  the  gram 
marians  designate  as  Macedonian  forms,  and  deriving  its  name  from  the 
city  of  Alexandrea,  the  centre  of  later  literary  culture.  The  Septuagint 
version  of  the  Old  Testament  was  written  in  this  dialect ;  but  it  can  hard 
ly  be  considered  a  fair  specimen  of  the  language  spoken  at  Alexandrea, 
since  the  Jewish  translators  have  introduced  into  the  version  many  He 
brew  phrases  and  constructions.  The  New  Testament  was  written  in 
the  same  dialect,  whence  it  passed,  with  some  variations,  into  the  writ 
ings  of  the  Fathers,  and  has  hence  been  called  Ecclesiastical  Greek.  The 
Greek  spoken  at  Constantinople  subsequently  assumed  a  still  more  cor 
rupt  form,  and  so  many  foreign  words  were  introduced  into  the  language 
that  a  glossary  is  necessary  for  understanding  many  of  the  writers  of  the 
Eastern  empire.3 

XLIII.  No  one  of  the  sister  tongues  can  compete  with  the  Greek  in  re 
gard  to  sound,  or  in  fertility  of  composition  and  flection,  in  luxuriance  of 
grammatical  forms,  and  in  many  delicate  phases  assumed  by  the  primary 
parts  of  speech ;  characteristics  reflecting  a  singular  acuteness  of  the  dis 
criminating  faculty,  and  affording  in  return  a  rich  fund  of  materials  for  its 
exercise.  The  nearest  approach  in  these  respects  is  made  by  the  Sanscrit. 
The  vowel-sounds  of  the  Sanscrit,  however,  are  comparatively  monoto 
nous,  occasionally  harsh  and  constrained.  Those  of  the  Greek,  on  the 
other  hand,  are  distinguished  for  variety  and  euphony.  In  the  combina 
tion  of  consonants  and  vowels,  the  Greek,  also,  exhibits  the  same  happy 
blending  of  uniformity  and  versatility,  the  same  just  medium  between  re 
dundancy  and  poverty,  which  characterizes  all  the  productions  of  Hellenic 
genius.4 

XLIV.  Another  remarkable  feature,  which  distinguishes  the  Greek 

1  Buttmann,  p.  4,  (>  12 ;  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  126. 

2  Buttmann,  I.  c. ;  Mure,  I.  c.  3  Penny  Cyclop.,  vol.  ix.,  p.  428. 
4  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  97,  scqq. 


INTRODUCTION. 


13 


from  all  the  other  European  dialects,  is  the  extreme  delicacy  and  sub 
tlety  of  its  metrical  and  musical  development,  as  shown  in  the  distinction 
which  obtained  in  familiar  pronunciation,  between  accent  and  quantity, 
and  in  the  nicety  of  the  laws  by  which  the  two  were  adjusted  in  their  re 
lation  to  each  other,  or  to  the  language  at  large.  In  the  modern  Euro 
pean  tongues  this  distinction  is  unknown.  Accent  and  quantity,  the  long 
syllable  and  the  accentuated  syllable,  are,  in  the  poetry  of  the  present 
day,  as  identical,  as  they  were  essentially  distinct  in  that  of  Greece.1 

XLV.  One  more  characteristic  of  the  Greek  language  remains  to  be 
mentioned,  and  to  which,  also,  no  parallel  can  probably  be  found  in  any 
other  cultivated  language,  namely,  its  anomaly.  This  feature  may  be 
classed  under  two  heads ;  anomaly  of  structure,  and  anomaly  of  syntax. 
The  former,  in  particular,  is  familiar  to  the  classical  scholar  in  the  ele 
mentary  rules  of  his  grammar :  that  no  Greek  verb  possesses,  for  exam 
ple,  its  full  complement  of  forms  derived  from  the  same  root ;  and  that 
many  of  the  verbs  in  most  universal  use  are  dependent,  even  for  certain 
of  their  more  fundamental  forms,  on  radically  distinct  sources.  Both 
peculiarities  constitute  important  elements  of  that  richness  and  variety 
which  form  such  prominent  characteristics  of  the  Greek  language.2 

i  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  97,  seq.q.  2  Id.  ib. 


GREEK  LITERATURE. 


CHAPTER  I. 
DIVISION  OF  THE  SUBJECT. 

I.  THE  literature  of  Greece  may  be  divided  most  conveniently  into 
SEVEN  PERIODS  ;  namely,  1.  The  Mythical;  2.  The  Poetical;  3.  The  Early 
Prosaic  ;  4.  The  Attic ;  5.  The  Alexandrine ;  6.  The  Roman ;  and,  7.  The 
Byzantine.1 

II.  The  First  or  Mythical  Period  comprises  the  origin  and  early  cultiva 
tion  of  the  art  of  poetry,  with  the  legendary  notices  of  those  bards  and 
sages  to  whom  popular  belief  ascribed  the  first  advances  in  literary  cul 
ture,  but  of  whose  existence  or  influence  no  authentic  monuments  have 
been  preserved. 

III.  The  Second  or  Poetical  Period  extends  from  the  epoch  of  the  ear 
liest  authenticated  productions  of  Greek  poetical  genius,  through  those 
ages  in  which  poetry  continued  to  be  either  the  only,  or  else  the  most 
assiduously  cultivated  branch  of  composition,  and  terminates  about  the 
period  of  the  Persian  wrar. 

IV.  The  Third  or  Early  Prosaic  Period  begins,  in  fact,  before  the  full 
termination  of  the  preceding  one,  with  the  first  attempts  at  prose  compo 
sition,  and  extends  to  and  includes  the  era  of  Herodotus. 

V.  The  Fourth  or  Attic  Period  commences  with  the  rise  of  the  Attic 
drama,  and  of  the  fuller  culture  of  prose  literature,  and  closes  with  the 
establishment  of  the  Macedonian  ascendency,  and  the  consequent  extinc 
tion  of  republican  freedom  in  Greece. 

VI.  The  Fifth  or  Alexandrine  Period  may  be  dated  from  the  foundation 
of  Alexandrea,  and  ends  with  the  fall  of  the  Graeco-Egyptian  empire. 

VII.  The  Sixth  or  Roman  Period  succeeds,  and  extends  to  the  founda 
tion  of  Constantinople. 

VIII.  The  Seventh  or  Byzantine  Period  comprises  the  remaining  ages 
of  the  decay  and  corruption  of  ancient  civilization,  until  the  final  extinc 
tion  of  the  classical  Greek  as  a  living  language. 

IX.  Some  divide  the  history  of  Greek  literature  into  three  periods  mere 
ly  ;  the  first  extending  from  the  earliest  times  to  the  rise  of  Athenian 
literature  ;  the  second  comprising  the  flourishing  period  of  Athenian  liter 
ature  ;  and  the  third  comprehending  all  the  writers  from  the  time  of  Al 
exander  to  the  fall  of  the  Eastern  empire.     This  arrangement,  however, 
is  open  to  serious  objections,  and  is  by  no  means  equal,  in  point  of  pre 
cision  and  clearness,  to  the  one  which  we  have  first  given,  and  which 
will  be  followed  in  the  present  work. 


1  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  j.,  p.  6.     Compare  Bcrnhardy,  vol.  i.,  p.  148. 


MYTHICAL    PERIOD. 


15 


CHAPTER  II. 
FIRST  OR  MYTHICAL  PERIOD. 

I.  MANY  centuries1  must  have  elapsed  before  the  poetical  language  of 
the  Greeks  could  have  attained  to  the  splendor,  copiousness,  and  fluency 
which  so  strongly  excite  our  admiration  in  the  poems  of  Homer.     The 
first  outpourings  of  poetical  enthusiasm  were  doubtless  songs  describing, 
in  few  and  simple  verses,  events  which  powerfully  affected  the  feelings 
of  the  hearers. 

II.  It  is  probable  that  the  earliest  date  may  be  assigned  to  the  songs 
which  referred  to  the  seasons  and  their  phenomena,  and  expressed  with 
simplicity  the  notions  and  feelings  to  which  these  events  gave  birth. 
They  appear  to  have  been  sung  by  peasants  at  the  corn  and  wine  har 
vests. 

III.  It  is  remarkable  that  songs  of  this  kind  often  had  a  plaintive  and 
melancholy  character ;  which  circumstance,  however,  is  explained  when 
we  remember  that  the  ancient  worship  of  outward  nature  (which  was 
preserved  in  the  rites  of  Ceres  and  Proserpina,  and  also  in  those  of  Bac 
chus)  contained  festivals  of  wailing  and  lamentation,  as  well  as  of  rejoic 
ing  and  mirth. 

I.     THE     LINUS. 

IV.  To  the  number  of  these  plaintive  ditties  belongs  the  song  LINUS 
(AiVos),  mentioned  by  Homer,2  the  melancholy  character  of  which  is 
shown  by  its  fuller  names,  A.1\ivos3  and  On^Aii/os*  (literally,  "  Alas !  Li 
nus,"  and  "  Death  of  Linus").     It  was  frequently  sung  in  Greece,  accord 
ing  to  Homer,  at  the  grape-picking.     From  a  fragment  of  Hesiod,5  it 
would  appear  probable  that  the  song  of  lamentation  began  and  ended 
with  the  exclamation  At  AiVe. 

V.  Linus  wras  originally  the  subject  of  this  song,  the  person  whose  fate 
was  bewailed  in  it ;  and  there  were  many  districts  in  Greece  (for  exam 
ple,  Thebes,  Chalcis,  and  Argos)  in  which  tombs  of  Linus  were  shown. 

VI.  According  to  the  very  remarkable  and  explicit  tradition  of  the  Ar- 
gives,  Linus  was  a  youth  who,  having  sprung  from  a  divine  origin,  grew 
up  with  the  shepherds  among  the  lambs,  and  was  torn  in  pieces  by  wild 
dogs.     Similar  legends  are  found  in  other  parts  of  Greece,  and  also  in 
Asia  Minor,  wherein  boys  in  the  bloom  of  youth,  and  of  divine  parentage, 
are  supposed  to  have  been  drowned,  or  devoured  by  raging  dogs,  or  de 
stroyed  by  wdd  beasts,  and  whose  death  is  lamented  in  the  harvest,  or 
other  periods  of  the  hottest  season  of  the  year.6 

VII.  The  real  object  of  lamentation,  however,  both  in  the  Linus  and 

1  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  16,  seqq.  2  II,  xviii.,  569,  seqq. 

3  JEsch.,  Ag.,  121 ;  Soph.,  Aj.,  627  ;  Pausan.,  ix.,  29,  8.  *  Pausan.,  ix.,  29,  3. 

5  Ap.  Eustath.,  p.  1163  (fragm.  1,  ed.  Gaisf.). 
fi  Fabric.,  Bibl.  Grose.,  vol.  i.,  p.  110,  seqq.,  ed.  Harlts 


16  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

in  all  these  other  dirges,  was  the  tender  beauty  of  spring  destroyed  by 
the  summer  heats,  and  other  phenomena  of  the  same  kind,  which  the 
imagination  of  these  early  times  invested  with  a  personal  form,  and  rep 
resented  as  being  of  a  divine  origin.  These  popular  dirges,  therefore, 
originally  the  expression  of  grief  at  the  premature  death  of  nature,  through 
the  heat  of  the  sun,  were  transformed  into  lamentations  for  the  death  of 
youths,  and  were  sung  on  certain  religious  occasions. 

VIII.  It  was  a  natural  confusion  of  the  tradition  that  Linus  should  aft 
erward  become  a  minstrel,  one  of  the  earliest  bards  of  Greece,1  who  be 
gins  a  contest  with  Apollo  himself,  and  overcomes  Hercules  in  playing 
on  the  cithara.     Even,  however,  in  this  character,  Linus  meets  his  death, 
having  been  killed  by  Hercules,2  and  we  must  probably  assume  that  his 
fate  was  mentioned  in  the  ancient  song. 

IX.  Plaintive  songs  of  this  same  kind,  in  which  not  the  misfortunes  of 
a  single  individual,  but  a  universal  and  perpetually  recurring  cause  of 
grief,  was  expressed,  abounded  in  ancient  Greece,  but  more  particularly 
in  Asia  Minor,  the  inhabitants  of  which  latter  country  had  a  peculiar 
fondness  for  mournful  tunes.    The  IALEMUS  ('IdAe/xos)3  seems  to  have  been 
nearly  identical  with  the  Linus,  as,  to  a  certain  extent,  the  same  mytho 
logical  narrations  are  applied  to  both.     At  Tegea,  in  Arcadia,  there  was 
a  plaintive  song  called  SCEPHRUS  (2/ce<£/>os),  which  appears,  from  the  fab 
ulous  relation  in  Pausanias,*  to  have  been  sung  at  the  time  of  the  summer 
heat.     In  Phrygia,  a  melancholy  song  called  LITYERSES  (Airvfpa-rjs)5  was 
sung  at  the  cutting  of  the  corn.     At  the  same  season  of  the  year,  the 
Mariandyni,  on  the  shores  of  the  Euxine,  played  the  mournful  ditty  called 
BORMUS  (Bcop/tios)6  on  the  native  flute.     Of  similar  meaning  are  the  cries 
for  the  youth  HYLAS  ("TAas),7  swallowed  up  by  the  waters  of  the  fountain, 
which,  in  the  neighboring  country  of  the  Bithyni,  re-echoed  from  mount 
ain  to  mountain.     In  the  southern  parts  of  Asia  Minor  we  find,  in  con 
nection  with  the  Syrian  worship,  a  similar  lament  for  ADONIS  (vA5«m),8 
and  in  Egypt  a  like  dirge  for  MANEROS 


II.     P-rEANS. 

X.  A  very  different  class  of  feelings  is  expressed  in  the  P^ANS  (n<ua- 
vfs:  in  Homer,  Haifaves).  These  songs  were  originally  dedicated  only 
to  Apollo,  and  were  closely  connected  with  the  ideas  relating  to  the  attri 
butes  and  actions  of  this  deity.  They  were  chants,  of  which  the  tune 
and  words  expressed  courage  and  confidence.  "All  sounds  of  lamenta 
tion"  (afrura),  says  Callimachus,  "  cease  when  the  le  Paean,  le  Paean  (tr? 
Uairjov)  is  heard."9  As  with  the  Linus  the  interjection  erf,  so  with  the 
Paean  the  cry  of  t^  was  connected  ;10  exclamations,  unmeaning  in  them 
selves,  but  made  expressive  by  the  tone  with  which  they  were  uttered. 

XL  Paeans  were  sung,  not  only  when  there  was  a  hope  of  being  able, 

1  Eudocia,  'lama,  p.  277.     Compare  Diod.  Sic.,  iii.,  c.  66. 

3  Diod.  Sic.,  1.  c.  ;  Fabric.,  1.  c.  3  JEsch.,  Supp.,  116  ;  Eurip.,  Phcen.,  1034. 

*  Pausan.,  viii.,  53,  2.  8  Ilgen,  Scol.  Gr.,  p.  xvi.,  seq. 

6  Athen.,  xv.,  p.  620,  A.  7  Ap.  Rhad.,  i.,  131,  1350. 

8  Apollod.,  iii..  14.  9  Hymn,  ad  Apoll.,  20.  10  Alhen.,  xv.,  p.  696,  E,  seqq. 


MYTHICAL    PERIOD.  17 

by  the  help  of  the  gods,  to  overcome  a  great  and  imminent  danger,  but 
when  the  danger  was  happily  past ;  they  were  songs  of  hope  and  confi 
dence,  as  well  as  of  thanksgiving  for  victory  and  safety.  The  custom  at 
the  termination -of  the  winter,  when  the  year  again  assumes  a  mild  and 
serene  aspect,  and  every  heart  is  filled  with  hope  and  confidence,  of  sing 
ing  vernal  paans  (fiapivol  Trotaves),  recommended  by  the  Delphic  oracle  to 
the  cities  of  Lower  Italy,  is  probably  of  very  high  antiquity. 

XII.  The  Paean  was  sung  by  several  persons,  one  of  whom  probably  led 
the  others,  and  the  singers  either  marched  onward  or  sat  together  at  table. 
Thus  Achilles,  after  the  death  of  Hector,  calls  upon  his  companions  to  re 
turn  to  the  ships,  singing  a  paean  on  account  of  the  glory  they  had  gained  j1 
and  the  Achasans,  after  restoring  Chryseis  to  her  father,  are  represented 
as  singing  a  paean  to  Apollo  at  the  end  of  the  sacrificial  feast,  in  order  to 
appease  his  wrath.2 

XIII.  The  Paean  was  also  sung,  in  a  later  age,  as  a  battle  song,  both  be 
fore  an  attack  on  the  enemy  and  after  the  battle  was  finished.3    This  prac 
tice  seems  to  have  prevailed  chiefly  among  the  Dorians,  but  it  was  also 
common  among  the  other  Greek  states.     The  origin  of  it  is  said  to  have 
arisen  from  the  fact  that  Apollo  sang  a  paean  after  his  victory  over  the 
Pythian  serpent.     It  must  be  remarked,  however,  that  the  Paean  was,  in 
later  times,  sung  to  the  honor  of  other  gods  besides  Apollo.     Thus  Xen- 
ophon  relates  that  the  Lacedaemonians  on  one  occasion  sang  a  paean  to 
Neptune,  to  propitiate  him  after  an  earthquake,4  and  also  that  the  Greek 
forces  in  Asia,  under  the  younger  Cyrus,  sang  a  paean  to  Jove.6 

III.  THE  THRENUS  AND  HYMEN^EUS. 

XIV.  Not  only  the  common  and  public  worship  of  the  gods,  but  also 
those  events  of  private  life  which  strongly  excited  the  feelings,  called  forth 
the  gift  of  poetry.    The  lamentation  for  the  dead,  which  was  chiefly  sung 
by  women,  with  vehement  expressions  of  grief,  had,  at  the  time  described 
by  Homer,  already  been  so  far  systematized,  that  singers  by  profession 
stood  near  the  bed  where  the  body  was  laid  out,  and  began  the  lament ; 
and  while  they  sang  it,  the  women  accompanied  them  with  cries  and 
groans.6     This  lament  was  called  the  THRENUS  (©pjcos)  or  "Dirge." 

XV.  Opposed  to  the  Threnus  is  the  HYMEN^EUS  ('T^eVotos),  the  joyful 
and  merry  bridal  song,  of  which  there  are  descriptions  by  Homer7  in  the 
account  of  the  designs  on  the  shield  of  Achilles,  and  by  Hesiod  in  that  of 
the  shield  of  Hercules.8    Homer  speaks  of  a  city,  represented  as  the  seat 
of  bridal  rejoicing,  in  which  the  bride  is  led  from  the  virgin's  apartment 
through  the  streets  by  the  light  of  torches.     A  loud  hymenaus  arises  : 
young  men  dance  around,  while  flutes  and  harps  ($6piJ.iyyes)  resound. 

i  II.,  xxiii.,  391.  =  Ib.,  i.,  473. 

3  Thucyd.,  i.,  50  ;  iv.,  43  ;  ii.,  91 ;  vii.,  44  ;  Xen.,  Anab.,  i.,  8,  17. 

*  Xen.,  Hell.,  iv.,  7,  4.  '  Id.,  Anab.,  iii.,  2,  9.  «  /^  xxiv>>  720,  seqq. 

7  Ib.,  xviii.,  492,  seqq.  8  Scut.,  274,  seqq. 


18 


GREEK    LITERATURE. 


IV.     EARLY      BARDS.1 


XVI.  After  this  brief  sketch  of  the  kinds  of  poetry  which  existed  in 
Greece  before  the  Homeric  era,  with  the  exception  of  the  epic,  we  will 
now  proceed  to  give  some  account  of  the  early  composers  of  sacred  songs 
and  hymns,  as  far  as  any  reliable  information  can  be  obtained  respecting 
them  from  the  confused  mass  of  statements  contained  in  later  writers. 
The  best  accounts  of  these  early  bards  were  those  which  had  been  pre 
served  in  the  temples,  at  the  places  where  hymns  were  sung  under  their 
names.     Hence  it  appears  that  most  of  these  names  are  in  constant  con 
nection  with  the  worship  of  peculiar  deities  ;  and  it  will  thus  be  easy  to 
distribute  them  into  certain  classes,  formed  by  the  resemblance  of  their 
character  and  their  reference  to  the  same  worship. 

(A.)     SINGERS     BELONGING     TO     THE    WORSHIP    OF    APOLLO     IN     DELPHI, 
D  E  L  0  S,    AND     CRETE. 

XVII.  Among  these,  one  of  the  most  conspicuous  is  OLEN  ('nArji/). 
According  to  the  ancient  legend,2  he  was  a  Lycian  or  Hyperborean,  that 
is  to  say,  sprung  from  a  country  where  Apollo  loved  to  dwell.     Many 
ancient  hymns,  attributed  to  him,  were  preserved  at  Delos,  which  are 
mentioned  by  Herodotus,3  and  which  contained  remarkable  mythological 
traditions,  and  significant  appellatives  of  the  gods ;    also  names  (j/d>0, 
that  is,  simple  and  antique  songs,  combined  with  certain  fixed  tunes,  and 
fitted  to  be  sung  for  the  circular  dance  of  a  chorus.     The  Delphian  poet 
ess  Boeo  called  him  the  first  prophet  of  Phoebus,  and  the  first  who,  in 
early  times,  founded  the  style  of  singing  in  epic  metre  (eVeW  aotfd).4 
His  name,  according  to  Welcker,  signifies  simply  the  flute-player.5     Of 
the  ancient  hymns  which  went  under  his  name,  Pausanias  mentions  those 
to  Juno,  to  Achana,  and  to  Ilithyia.     The  last  of  these  was  in  celebration 
of  the  birth  of  Apollo  and  Diana. 

XVIII.  Another  of  these  bards  is  PHILAMMON  (&i\dfj.[ji.<av),  said  to  have 
been  a  son  of  Apollo,6  and  who  became,  by  the  nymph  Argiope,  who 
dwelt  on  Parnassus,  the  father  of  Thamyris  and  Eumolpus.7    He  is  close 
ly  associated  with  the  worship  of  Apollo  at  Delphi,  and  with  the  music 
of  the  cithara.     To  him  also  was  referred  the  formation  of  the  Delphian 
choruses  of  virgins,  which  sang  the  birth  of  Latona,  and  that  of  her  chil 
dren,  Apollo  and  Diana ;  and  some  ascribe  to  him  the  invention  of  choral 
music  in  general.     According  to  Pherecydes,8  it  was  Philammon,  and  not 
Orpheus,  who  accompanied  the  Argonauts. 

XIX.  Another  bard  of  this  class  was  a  Cretan,  named  CHRYSOTHEMIS 
(Xpv<r6ee/j.is),  who  is  said  to  have  sung  the  first  chorus  to  the  Pythian 

1  Miller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  24,  seqq. 
Suid.,  s.  v.  ;  Fair.,  Bibl.  Gr.,  vol.  i.,  p.  134,  ed.  Harles. 
Herod.,  iv.,  35.     Compare  Pausan.,  i.,  18.  5  ;  ii.,  13,  3  ;  v.,  7,  8,  &c. 
Pausan.,  x.,  5,  8.  5  Welcker,  Europa  und  Kadmos,  p.  35. 

Tatian.  adv.  Gr&c.,  62,  seq.     Compare  Ovid,  Met.,  xi.,  317. 
Apollod.,  i.,  3,  3;  Pausan.,  iv.,  33,  3. 
Ap.  Sckol.  ad  Apoll.  Rhod.,  i.,  23.     Compare  Fabric.,  Jiibl.  f,V.,  vol.  i.,  p.  214. 


MYTHICAL    PERIOD.  19 

Apollo,  clothed  in  the  solemn  dress  of  ceremony,  which  the  citharcedi,  in 
later  times,  wore  at  the  Pythian  games.1 

(B.)     SINGERS    IN    CONNECTION     WITH     THE     COGNATE    WORSHIPS     OF 
CERES     AND    BACCHUS. 

XX.  Among  these  were  the  EUMOLPID^E  (Ev/xoAmSai),  of  Eleusis  in  At 
tica,  a  race  which,  from  early  times,  took  part  in  the  worship  of  Ceres, 
and,  in  the  historical  age,  exercised  the  chief  sacerdotal  function  connect 
ed  with  it,  namely,  the  office  of  Hierophant.2     These  Eumolpidae  evident 
ly  derived  their  name,  which  means  "  beautiful  singers,"  from  their  char 
acter  (eS  ,ueA7rea-0cu),  and  their  original  employment  was  the  singing  of 
sacred  hymns.     Popular  tradition,  however,  made  them  to  be  the  de 
scendants  of  a  Thracian  named  EUMOLPUS  (Etf/*oAiros),  who  is  described 
as  having  come  to  Attica  either  as  a  bard,  a  warrior,  or  a  priest  of  Ceres 
and  Bacchus.     As  Eumolpus  is  evidently  a  mythic  personage,  the  vari 
ous  legends  respecting  his  origin  and  history  need  not  be  given  here.    It 
will  be  sufficient  to  state  that  he  was  regarded  as  an  ancient  priestly  bard, 
and  that  poems  and  writings  on  the  mysteries  were  fabricated  and  circu 
lated  at  a  later  period  under  his  name.     One  hexameter  line  of  a  Dionys- 
iac  hymn,  ascribed  to  him,  is  preserved  in  Diodorus.3     The  legends  con 
nected  him,  also,  with  Hercules,  whom  he  is  said  to  have  instructed  in 
music,  or  initiated  into  the  mysteries.4 

XXI.  Another  Attic  house,  the  LycoMinyE  (Awco/ilSou),  which  likewise 
had,  in  later  times,  a  part  in  the  Eleusinian  worship  of  Ceres,  were  in  the 
habit  of  singing  hymns,  and,  moreover,  hymns  ascribed  to  Orpheus,  Mu- 
saeus,  and  Pamphos. 

XXII.  Of  the  songs  which  were  attributed  to  PAMPHOS  (ncfyidws6),  we 
may  form  a  general  idea  by  remembering  that  he  is  said  to  have  first 
sung  the  strain  of  lamentation  at  the  tomb  of  Linus.6     Besides  this  Li- 
nus-song,  he  is  said  to  have  composed  hymns  to  Ceres,  Diana,  Neptune, 
Jove,  and  Eros.     Pausanias  places  him  later  than  Olen,  and  much  earlier 
than  Homer.7     Philostratus8  has  preserved  for  us  two  remarkable  verses 
ascribed  to  this  bard,  which  remind  us  forcibly  of  the  symbol  (the  scara- 
baus)  under  which  the  Egyptians  represented  the  Creator  of  the  universe, 
or  the  author  of  animal  life. 

Zev  Kv8i<TTe,  /meyurre  &<=S>v,  eiAvjueVe  Koirpta 
/xrjA.ei77  re  Kal  Inireirj  nal  ^jatoveoj. 

"  O  Jove,  most  glorious,  most  mighty  of  the  gods,  enveloped  in  the 
dung  of  sheep,  and  horses,  and  mules." 

XXIII.  The  name  of  MUSJEUS  (Mov<ra?os),  which,  in  fact,  only  signified 
a  singer  inspired  by  the  Muses,  is  in  Attica  generally  connected  with 
songs  for  the  initiations  of  Ceres,  and  the  legend  represented  him  as  pre- 

1  Pausan.,  x.,  7,  2. 

2  Hesych.,  s.  v.  Ev/*oA.;ri8eu ;  Tac.,  Hist.,  iv.,  82;  Arnob.,  v.,  25;  Clemens  Alex.,  Pro- 
trept.,  p.  16,  seqq.  3  Diod.  Sic.,  i.,  11.     Compare  Suid.,  s.  v.  Euju.oA.7ros. 

*  Hygin.,  Fab.,  273;  Theocrit.,  xxiv.,  108;  Apollod.,  ii.,  5,  12. 

5  Often  incorrectly  written  Tla/Ac/x)?. 

6  Pausan.,  ix.,  29,  3.     Compare  Bernkardy,  Grundriss  der  Grieck.  Lit.,  vol.  i.,  p.  248.     . 
1  Pausan.,  1.  c.  e  Heroic.,  p.  603.     Compare  Bernhardy,  I.  c. 


20 


GREEK    LITERATURE. 


siding  over  her  rites  in  the  time  of  Hercules.1  Among  the  numerous 
works  ascribed  to  him,  a  hymn  to  Ceres  is  alone  considered  by  Pausanias 
as  genuine.2  Musaeus,  in  tradition,  is  commonly  called  a  Thracian.  He 
is  also  reckoned  as  one  of  the  race  of  Eumolpidae,  and  stated  to  be  the 
disciple  of  Orpheus.3  Pausanias  mentions  a  tradition  that  the  Mova-elo? 
in  the  Piraeeus  bore  that  name  from  having  been  the  place  where  Musaeus 
was  buried.* 

We  find  the  following  poetical  compositions  accounted  as  his  among 
the  ancients  :5  1.  Xpqffpol,  Oracles.6  Onomacritus,  in  the  time  of  the 
Pisistratidae,  made  it  his  business  to  collect  and  arrange  the  oracles  that 
passed  under  the  name  of  Musaeus,  and  was  banished  by  Hipparchus  for 
interpolating  in  the  collection  oracles  of  his  own  making.7  2.  'T7ro0f?/cai, 
or  Precepts,  addressed  to  his  son  Eumolpus,  and  extending  to  the  length 
of  4000  lines.8  3.  A  hymn  to  Ceres,  mentioned  above  as,  according  to 
Pausanias,9  the  only  genuine  production  of  Musaeus  extant  in  his  day- 
4.  'Ela/ceVets  v6<TQ)v.l°  5.  Qeoyovia.11  6.  Tmwoypatfu'a.12  7.  2^>a?/)a.13  What 
this  was  is  not  clear.  8.  UapaXixreis,  TeXerat,  and  RaBappot.1*  Aristotle 
quotes  some  verses  of  Musaeus,  but  without  specifying  from  what  work 
or  collection.16  The  poem  on  the  loves  of  Hero  and  Leander  is  by  a  very 
much  later  author  of  the  same  name.  Nothing  remains  of  the  poems  at 
tributed  to  Musaeus  but  the  few  quotations  in  Pausanias,  Plato,  Clemens 
Alexandrinus,  Philostratus,  and  Aristotle.16 

XXIV.  The  Thracian  singer  ORPHEUS  ('Op</>eus)  is  unquestionably  the 
darkest  point  in  the  entire  history  of  the  early  Greek  poetry,  on  account  of 
the  scantiness  of  the  information  respecting  him  which  has  been  preserved 
in  the  more  ancient  writers.  This  deficiency  is  ill  supplied  by  the  multi 
tude  of  marvellous  stories  concerning  him  which  occur  in  later  writers, 
and  by  the  poems  and  poetical  fragments  which  are  extant  under  his  name. 

The  name  of  Orpheus  does  not  occur  in  the  Homeric  or  Hesiodic  po 
ems,  but  during  the  lyric  period  it  had  attained  to  great  celebrity.  Iby- 
cus,  wrho  flourished  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth  century  B.C.,  mentions 
him  as  "the  renowned  Orpheus"  (6vofj.aK\vTbv"Op(pT]v).1''  Pindar  enumer 
ates  him  among  the  Argonauts  as  the  celebrated  harp-player,  father  of 
songs,  and  as  sent  forth  by  Apollo.18  In  the  dramatic  poets,  also,  there 
are  several  references  to  Orpheus. 

Many  poems  ascribed  to  Orpheus  were  current  as  early  as  the  time  of 
the  Pisistratidae,  and  they  are,  moreover,  often  quoted  by  Plato.  The 
allusions  in  them  to  later  writers  are  very  frequent ;  for  example,  Pau- 

1  Diod.  Sic.,  iv.,  25.  2  Pausan.,  i.,  22,  7.     Compare  iv.,  1,  5. 

3  Diod.,  I.  c. ;  Serv.,  ad  Virg.  JEn.,  vi.,  667.  4  Pausan.,  i.,  25,  8. 

5  Fabric.,  Bibl.  Gr.,  vol.  i.,  p.  120,  seqq. 

«  Aristoph.,  Ran.,  1031  ;  Pans.,  x.,  9, 11  ;  Herod.,  viii.,  96. 

7  Herod.,  vii.,  6 ;  Pausan.,  i.,  22,  7.        8  Suid.,  s.  v.  Mouo-aZos.        9  Pausan.,  i.,  22,  7. 

10  Aristoph.,  Ran.,  1031 ;  Plin.,  H.  N.,  xxi.,  8,  21.  "•  Diog.  Laert.,Procem.,  3. 

12  Sckol.  ad  Apol.  Rhod.,  iii.,  1200  ;  Eudocia,  'Itovia,  p.  248       l3  Diog.  Laert.,  L  c. 

**  Sckol.  ad  Aristoph.,  L  c. ;  Plat.,  De  Repub.,  ii.,  p.  364,  extr. 

15  Aristot.,  Polit.,  viii.,  5  ;  Hist.  An.,  vi.,  6.  is  Fabric.,  Bibl.  Gr.,  I.  c. 

17  Ap.  Prise.,  vi.,  18,  92,  vol.  i.,  p.  283,  ed.  Krehl  (fragm.  22,  ed.  Schneidewin). 

is  Find.,  Pyth.,  iv.,  315. 


M  Y  T  H I  C  A  L    P  E  R  I O  D. 

sanias  speaks  of  hymns  of  his  which  he  believed  to  be  still  preserved  by 
the  Lycomidae,  of  whom  we  have  already  made  mention,  and  which 
hymns,  he  says,  were  only  inferior  in  beauty  to  the  poems  of  Homer,  and 
held  even  in  higher  honor,  on  account  of  their  divine  subjects.  He  also 
speaks  of  them  as  very  few  in  number,  and  distinguished  by  great  brev 
ity  of  style.1 

Considering  the  slight  acquaintance  which  the  ancients  evidently  pos 
sessed  with  these  works,  it  is  somewhat  surprising  that  certain  extant 
poems  which  bear  the  name  of  Orpheus  should  have  been  generally  re 
garded  by  scholars,  until  a  very  recent  period,  as  genuine,  that  is,  as 
works  more  ancient  than  the  Homeric  poems,  if  not  the  productions  of 
Orpheus  himself.  It  is  now,  however,  fully  established  that  the  bulk  of 
these  poems  are  the  forgeries  of  Christian  grammarians  and  philosophers 
of  the  Alexandrean  school ;  but  still  that  among  the  fragments,  which 
form  a  part  of  the  collection,  are  some  genuine  remains  of  that  Orphic 
poetry  which  was  known  to  Plato,  and  which  must  be  assigned  to  the  pe 
riod  of  Onomacritus,  or  perhaps  a  little  earlier.  The  Orphic  literature, 
which,  in  this  sense,  we  may  call  genuine,  seems  to  have  included  Hymns, 
a  Theogony,  an  ancient  poem  called  Mini/as,  or  the  Descent  into  Hades,  Ora 
cles,  and  Songs  for  Initiations  (TeA-erai),  a  collection  of  Sacred  Legends  ('le- 
pol  \6yoi),  ascribed  to  Cercops,  and  perhaps  some  other  works.2 

The  apocryphal  productions  which  have  come  down  to  us  under  the 
name  of  Orphica  (5O^i/ca),  are  the  following:3  1.  'ApyovavTind,  an  epic 
poem  in  1384  hexameters,  giving  an  account  of  the  expedition  of  the  Ar 
gonauts.  It  is  full  of  indications  of  its  late  date.  2.  "T/^j/ot,  eighty-seven 
or  eighty-eight  hymns  in  hexameters,  evidently  the  productions  of  the 
Neo-Platonic  school.  3.  AiOwd,  the  best  of  the  three  apocryphal  Orphic 
poems,  which  treats  of  the  properties  of  stones  both  precious  and  com 
mon,  and  their  uses  in  divination.  4.  Fragments,  chiefly  of  the  Theogo- 
ny.  It  is  in  this  class  that  we  find  the  genuine  remains,  above  referred 
to,  of  the  literature  of  the  early  Orphic  theology,  but  intermingled  with 
others  of  a  much  later  date.4 

The  chief  editions  of  Orpheus,  after  the  early  ones  of  1517,  1519,  1540,  1543,  1566,  and 
1606,  are  those  of  Eschenbach,  Traj.  ad  Rhen.,  1689,  12mo;  Gesner  and  Hamberger, 
Lips.,  1764,  8vo  ;  and  Hermann,  Lips.,  1805,  8vo,  by  far  the  best. 

The  genuine  fragments  are  collected  by  Lobeck  in  his  Aglaophamus,  vol.  i.,  p.  410, 
seqq.,  Regiment.,  1829. 

(C.)  SINGERS  AND  MUSICIANS,  WHO  BELONGED  TO  THE  PHRYGIAN  WOR 
SHIP  OF  THE  GREAT  MOTHER  OF  THE  GODS,  OF  THE  CORYBANTES,  ETC.5 

XXV.  The  Phrygians,  allied  indeed  to  the  Greeks,  yet  a  separate  and 
distinct  nation,  differed  from  their  neighbors  in  their  strong  disposition 
to  an  orgiastic  worship,  that  is,  a  worship  which  was  connected  with  a 
tumult  and  excitement  produced  by  loud  music  and  violent  bodily  move 
ments,  such  as  occurred  in  Greece  at  the  Bacchanalian  rejoicings ;  where, 

1  Pausan.,  ix.,  30,  5.  ^~Smit^s~Dict7Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Fabric.,  Bibl.  Gr.,  vol.  i.,  p.  148,  seqq. 

*  Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.     Compare  Bernhardy,  Grundriss  d.  Griech.  Litt.,  vol.  ii.,  p. 
.  s  Mutter,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  26. 


22  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

however,  it  never,  as  in  Phrygia,  gave  its  character  to  every  variety  of 
divine  worship.  With  this  worship  was  connected  the  development  of  a 
peculiar  kind  of  music,  especially  of  the  flute,  which  instrument  was  al 
ways  considered  in  Greece  to  possess  a  stimulating  and  passion-stirring 
force.  This,  in  the  Phrygian  tradition,  was  ascribed  to  the  demi-god 
MARSYAS,!  who  is  known  as  the  inventor  of  the  flute,  and  the  unsuccess 
ful  opponent  of  Apollo,  to  his  disciple  OLYMPUS, 2  and,  lastly,  to  HYAGNis,3 
to  whom  also  the  composition  of  nomes  addressed  to  the  Phrygian  deities 
in  a  native  melody  was  attributed. 

V.  ANCIENT  THRACIAN  MINSTRELS.4 

XXVI.  By  far  the  most  remarkable  circumstance  in  these  accounts  of 
the  earliest  minstrels  of  Greece  is  that  several  of  them,  especially  from 
the  second  of  the  three  classes  just  described,  are  called  THRACIANS.     It 
is  utterly  inconceivable  that,  in  the  later  historic  times,  when  the  Thra- 
cians  were  contemned  as  a  barbarian  race,  a  notion  should  have  sprung 
up  that  the  first  civilization  of  Greece  was  due  to  them ;  consequently, 
we  can  not  doubt  that  this  was  a  tradition  handed  down  from  a  very 
early  period.     Now,  if  we  are  to  understand  it  to  mean  that  Eumolpus, 
Orpheus,  Musaeus,  and  others,  were  the  fellow-countrymen  of  those  Edo- 
nians,  Odrysians,  and  Odomantians,  who,  in  the  historical  age,  occupied 
the  Thraciari  territory,  and  who  spoke  a  barbarian  language,  that  is,  one 
unintelligible  to  the  Greeks,  we  must  despair  of  being  able  to  comprehend 
these  accounts  of  the  ancient  Thracian  minstrels,  and  of  assigning  them 
a  place  in  the  history  of  Greek  civilization. 

XXVII.  When  we  come,  however,  to  trace  more  precisely  the  country 
of  these  Thracian  bards,  we  find  that  the  traditions  refer  to  Pieria,  a  dis 
trict  to  the  east  of  the  range  of  Olympus,  to  the  north  of  Thessaly,  and 
the  south  of  Emathia  or  Macedonia.     In  other  words,  they  refer  to  a 
narrow  slip  of  country,  on  the  southeastern  coast  of  Macedonia,  extend 
ing  from  the  mouth  of  the  Peneus  to  the  Haliacmon,  and  bounded  on  the 
west  by  Mount  Olympus  and  its  offshoots.     In  Pieria,  likewise,  was  Li- 
bethra,  where  the  Muses  are  said  to  have  snng  the  lament  over  the  tomb 
of  Orpheus.     The  ancient  poets,  moreover,  always  make  Pieria,  not 
Thrace,  the  native  place  of  the  Muses,  which  last  Homer  clearly  distin 
guishes  from  Pieria.     It  was  not  until  the  Pierians  were  pressed  in  their 
own  country  by  the  early  Macedonian  princes  that  some  of  them  crossed 
the  Strymon  into  Thrace  Proper,  where  Herodotus  mentions  the  castles 
of  the  Pierians  at  the  time  of  the  expedition  of  Xerxes.5 

XXVIII.  It  is,  however,  quite  conceivable  that,  in  early  times,  either 
on  account  of  their  close  vicinity,  or  because  all  the  north  was  compre 
hended  under  one  name,  the  Pierians  might,  in  Southern  Greece,  have 
been  called  Thracians.     These  Pierians,  from  the  intellectual  relations 
which  they  maintained  with  the  Greeks,  appear  to  have  been  a  Grecian 

1  Apollod.,  i.,  4,  2;  Diod.,  iii.,  58,  59.  2  Suid.,  s.  v.  " 

3  Pint.,  2,  p.  1132,  F. ;  Anthol.  Pal.,  9,  266.  *  Mutter,  I.  c. 

s.  Herod.,  vii.,  112. 


MYTHICAL    PERIOD.  23 

race ;  which  supposition  is  also  confirmed  by  the  Greek  names  of  their 
places,  rivers,  fountains,  &c.,  although  it  is  probable  that,  situated  on  the 
limits  of  the  Greek  nation,  they  may  have  borrowed  largely  from  the 
neighboring  tribes.1 

XXIX.  These  same  Thracians  or  Pierians  lived,  up  to  the  time  of  the 
Doric  and  ^/Eolic  migrations,  in  certain  districts  of  Bceotia  and  Phocis. 
That  they  had  dwelt  about  the  Boeotian  mountain  of  Helicon,  in  the  dis 
trict  of  Thespiae  and  Ascra,  was  evident  to  the  ancient  historians,  as  well 
from  the  traditions  of  the  cities  as  from  the  agreement  of  many  names 
of  places  in  the  country  near  Olympus,  such  as  Libetkrion,  Pimpleis,  Hel 
icon,  &c.     At  the  foot  of  Parnassus,  moreover,  in  Phocis,  was  said  to 
have  been  situated  the  city  of  Daulis,  the  seat  of  the  Thracian  king  Te- 
reus,  who  is  known  by  his  connection  with  the  Athenian  king  Pandion, 
and  by  the  fable  of  the  metamorphosis  of  his  wife  Procne  into  a  nightin 
gale.     From  what  has  been  said,  then,  it  appears  sufficiently  clear  that 
these  Pierians  or  Thracians,  dwelling  about  Helicon  and  Parnassus,  in  the 
vicinity  of  Attica,  are  chiefly  signified  when  a  Thracian  origin  is  ascribed 
to  the  mythical  bards  of  Attica. 

XXX.  With  these  movements  of  the  Pierians  was  also  connected  the 
extension  of  the  temples  of  the  MUSES  in  Greece,  who  alone  among  the 
gods  are  represented  by  the  ancient  poets  as  presiding  over  poetry,  since 
Apollo,  in  strictness,  is  only  concerned  with  the  music  of  the  cithara. 
Homer  calls  the  Muses  the  Olympian ;  in  Hesiod,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Theogony,  they  are  called  the  Heliconian,  although,  according  to  the  no 
tion  of  the  Boeotian  poet,  they  were  born  at  Olympus,  and  dwelt  at  a 
short  distance  from  the  highest  pinnacle  of  this  mountain,  where  Jove 
was  enthroned ;  whence  they  only  go  at  times  to  Helicon,  bathe  in  the 
Hippocrene,  and  celebrate  their  choral  dances  around  the  altar  of  Jove, 
on  the  top  of  the  mountain.     Now,  when  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  the 
same  mountain  on  which  the  worship  of  the  Muses  originally  flourished 
was  also  represented  in  the  earliest  Greek  poetry  as  the  common  abode 
of  the  gods,  it  seems  highly  probable  that  it  was  the  poets  of  this  region, 
the  ancient  Pierian  minstrels,  whose  imagination  had  created  this  coun 
cil  of  the  gods,  and  had  distributed  and  arranged  its  parts. 

XXXI.  The  poetry  of  these  Pierian  minstrels,  moreover,  was  doubtless 
not  concerned  merely  with  the  gods,  but  contained  the  first  germs  of  the 
Epic  or  Heroic  style.     More  especially  should  Thamyris,  who  in  Homer 
is  called  a  Thracian,2  and  in  other  writers  a  son  of  Philammon3  (by  which 
the  neighborhood  of  Daulis  is  designated  as  his  abode),  be  considered  as 
an  Epic  poet,  although  some  hymns  were  ascribed  to  him ;  for  in  the  ac 
count  of  Homer,  that  Thamyris,  while  going  from  one  prince  to  another, 
and  having  just  returned  from  Eurytus  of  CEchalia,  was  deprived  of  both 
his  eyesight  and  his  power  of  singing  and  playing  on  the  cithara  by  the 
Muses,  with  whom  he  had  undertaken  to  contend,4  it  is  much  more  nat 
ural  to  understand  a  poet,  such  as  Phemius  and  Demodocus,  who  enter- 
tained  kings  and  nobles  at  meals  by  the  narration  of  heroic  adventures, 

1  Miiller,  Dorians,  vol.  i.,  p.  472,  488,  501.  2  II. ,  ii.,  594,  seqq. ~~ 

3  Apollod.,  i.,  3,  3  ;  Pausan.,  iv.,  33,  4  ;  x.,  7,  2.  *  //.,  ii.,  594,  seqq. 


24  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

than  a  singer  devoted  to  the  pious  service  of  the  gods  and  the  celebra 
tion  of  their  praises  in  hymns. 

These  remarks  lead  naturally  to  the  consideration  of  the  Epic  style  of 
poetry,  or,  in  other  words,  to  the  second  division  of  our  subject,  namely, 
the  Poetical  Period. 


CHAPTER  III. 
SECOND   OR  POETICAL   PERIOD. 

INTRODUCTORY    REMARKS.1 

I.  THE  Second  or  Poetical  Period  of  Grecian  literature  extends,  as  we 
have  already  remarked,  from  the  period  of  the  earliest  authenticated 
productions  of  poetical  genius,  or,  in  other  words,  from  Homer  and  the 
Homeric  poems,  down  to  about  the  period  of  the  Persian  war. 

II.  The  whole  poetical  literature  of  Greece  was  familiarly  classed  by 
the  native  critics  under  three  comprehensive  heads:  Epic,  Lyric,  and 
Dramatic.     The  compositions  of  this  period,  however,  fall  strictly  under 
the  two  former  alone  ;  the  Drama  being  yet  so  completely  in  its  infancy 
as  not  to  supply  materials  for  a  separate  subdivision. 

III.  The  term  Epic,  in  its  literal  acceptation,  denotes  what  is  narrated 
or  recited ;  Lyric,  what  is  sung  to  the  lyre.     This,  however,  like  some 
other  similar  distinctions,  invented  at  a  later  stage  of  the  arts  to  which 
they  apply,  will  be  found  defective  in  regard  to  the  origin  or  more  nour 
ishing  epochs  of  those  arts     Epic  poems  were,  during  the  earlier  and 
better  days  of  Greek  heroic  minstrelsy,  chanted  to  an  instrumental  ac 
companiment  little  less  habitually  than  lyric  odes.     The  epithet  lyric, 
therefore,  might,  in  so  far,  appear  as  applicable  to  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey 
as  to  a  song  of  Sappho's  or  an  elegy  of  Mimnermus's.     The  distinction, 
however,  is  justified,  even  in  its  extension  to  this  early  period,  by  the 
more  artificial  nature  of  the  accompaniment,  and  the  more  vital  connec 
tion  between  the  music  and  the  words,  in  the  case  of  the  lyric  than  in 
that  of  the  epic  poems.     The  nice  distinction  of  terms  may  have  origina 
ted  about  the  period  when  lyric  composition  first  acquired  importance  as 
a  branch  of  cultivated  literature  ;  epic  poetry  being  then  on  the  decline, 
and  the  practice  of  its  musical  recital  gradually  falling  into  disuse. 

IV.  But  although,  in  point  of  origin,  these  two  branches  of  composi 
tion  may  be  classed  as  coeval,  yet  the  Epic  invariably  enjoys  a  priority 
of  cultivation  wherever  the  progress  of  letters,  as  in  Greece,  is  sponta 
neous  and  free  from  secondary  influence.     This  is  a  consequence  of  the 
more  direct  medium  through  which  it  appeals  to  the  sympathies ;  the 
mass  of  mankind,  in  all  ages,  being  more  interested  in  the  study  of  facts 
than  of  opinions,  in  listening  to  accounts  of  great  or  marvellous  adven 
tures  than  to  commentaries  on  the  admiration  of  which  they  may  be 
deserving. 


Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  168,  seqq. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  25 

V.  The  difference  of  the  mode,  too,  in  which  the  epic  and  lyric  styles 
are  embodied,  corresponds  to  that  of  their  characters.     In  the  epic,  an 
exclusive  preference  is  given  to  prolonged  metrical  forms  in  harmony 
with  the  continuity  of  the  narrative.     The  lyric,  on  the  other  hand,  offers 
a  greater  subdivision  and  a  more  varied  combination  of  numbers,  adapted 
to  its  more  lively  and  versatile  expression  of  thought  or  feeling.1 

VI.  Under  these  two  general  heads  of  Epic  and  Lyric  have  been  here 
comprised  various  works  but  partially  marked  by  the  proper  features  on 
which  the  distinction  just  drawn  depends,  and  which  might,  therefore, 
appear,  in  a  more  accurate  classification,  to  require  a  separate  allotment 
To  the  Epic  head,  for  example,  have  been  referred  the  "Works  and 

Hesiod,  and  the  so-called  Homeric  Hymns.  The  former  poem 
in  a  more  artificial  age  of  literature,  would  be  assigned  to  the  Didactic 
rather  than  the  Epic  style.  At  the  period,  however,  in  which  this  dis 
tinction  of  terms  takes  its  origin,  and,  indeed,  more  or  less,  throughout 
the  flourishing  ages  of  Grecian  art,  the  phrase  Epic  familiarly  denotes 
any  descriptive  or  narrative  work,  any  thing  told  or  recited,  as  distinct 
from  what  is  sung  or  dramatically  represented.  The  Homeric  Hymns 
on  the  other  hand,  might  seem,  both  in  right  of  their  title  and  their  sub 
ject,  to  belong  to  the  Lyric  order.  The  epic  character,  however,  in  the 
narrower  sense,  really  predominates  in  them  to  such  an  extent  as  to 
warrant  the  arrangement  here  adopted. 

VII.  From  deference  to  a  parallel  law  of  custom,  various  works  have 
been  embraced  in  the  Lyric  division  of  the  subject  which,  on  a  more 
subtle  principle  of  distinction,  might  appear  to  belong  more  properly  to 
The  Elegiac  measure,  for  example,  though,  in  its  origin  and 
early  use,  familiarly  ranked  as  lyric,  was  frequently  employed  in  narra 
tive  or  didactic  poems  of  considerable  compass.  It  may,  indeed,  be  con 
sidered  as  an  intermediate  stage  between  the  one  style  and  the  other 
aeing  compounded  of  purely  dactylic  elements,  with  such  modification  as 
was  requisite  to  adapt  the  old  heroic  hexameter  to  compositions  of  a 
more  fugitive  nature.  The  Iambic  trimeter,  on  the  other  hand  appro 
priated,  during  its  earlier  stages  of  cultivation,  to  the  same  class  of  poems 
as  the  elegy,  and,  like  it,  comprehended  under  the  general  head  of  lyric 
poetry,  possesses  epic  qualities  only  inferior  to  the  hexameter.2 

VIII.  Upon  the  above  general  data,  therefore,  the  whole  poetic  Greek 
literature  of  this  period  may  be  classed  as  follows  : 

FIRST.  Epic  Composition,  comprising,  in  addition  to  heroic  poems  prop 
erly  so  called,  every  work  in  hexameter  verse  possessing  reasonable 
claims  to  date  prior  to  the  period  of  the  Persian  war. 

SECOND.  Lyric  Composition,  comprising  every  poetical  work  not  em- 
Ddied  in  hexameter  verse,  and,  by  consequence,  the  whole  elegiac  and 
iambic,  in  addition  to  the  melic  and  choral  poetry  of  the  period. 
Each  class^vill  be  made  the  subject  of  a  separate  treatment. 

"" 


Mure,  Crit.  ^"^TlTsT"  •  Id.  «.,  vol.  i..  p.  174. 

B 


36  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 
HOMER. 

I.    PERSONAL    HISTORY    OF    HOMER.1 

I.  THE  various  dates  assigned  to  Homer's  age  offer  no  less  a  diversity 
than  500  years,  namely,  from  B.C.  1184  to  B.C.  684.     Crates  and  Era 
tosthenes  state  that  he  lived  within  the  first  century  after  the  Trojan 
war ;  Aristotle  and  Aristarchus  make  him  a  contemporary  of  the  Ionian 
migration,  140  years  after  the  war ;  the  chronologist  Apollodorus  gives 
the  year  240,  Porphyrius  275,  the  Parian  Marble  277,  Herodotus  400  after 
that  event ;  and  Theopompus  even  makes  him  a  contemporary  of  Gyges, 
king  of  Lydia.2    It  seems  most  probable  that  the  events  he  celebrated 
took  place  at  a  considerable  distance  from  his  time,  because,  as  observed 
by  Velleius  Paterculus,  he  represents  men  in  his  age  as  far  inferior  in 
strength  to  the  heroes  whom  he  celebrates. 

II.  The  place  of  Homer's  birth  was  the  subject  of  great  controversy, 
even  among  the  Greeks.     Seven  cities  are  enumerated  as  contending  for 
this  honor  in  the  following  distich : 

eTTTa  iroAeis  papvavTO  o-cxprjv  Sta  pi£av  'O/Arypov, 
Sjuvpva,  Xt'os,  Ko\o<f>u>v ,  'Waity,  IIv'A.os,  "Ap^yos,  'A-Or/vai. 

But,  in  fact,  there  were  more  than  seven  cities  which  claimed  Homer 
for  their  countryman  ;  for  if  we  number  all  those  that  we  find  mentioned 
in  different  passages  of  ancient  writers,  we  have  seventeen  or  nineteen 
mentioned  as  his  birth-place.  The  claims,  however,  of  most  of  them  are 
so  suspicious  and  feeble,  that  they  easily  vanish  before  a  closer  examin 
ation. 

III.  Athens,  for  instance,  alleged  that  she  was  the  metropolis  or  parent 
city  of  Smyrna,  and  had,  therefore,  a  right  to  number  Homer  among  her 
citizens  ;3  and  the  opinion  of  Aristarchus,  the  Alexandrine  critic,  which 
admitted  her  claim,  was  probably  qualified  with  the  same  explanation. 
Even  Chios  can  not  establish  its  right  to  be  considered  as  the  original 
source  of  the  Homeric  poetry,  although  the  claims  of  this  island  are  sup 
ported  by  the  high  authority  of  Simonides.     It  is  true  that  in  Chios  lived 
the  race  of  the  Homerida.    These,  however,  were  not  a  family,  but  mere 
ly  a  society  of  persons  who  followed  the  same  art,  and  therefore  wor 
shipped  the  same  gods,  and  who  placed  at  their  head  a  bard-hero,  from 
whom  they  derived  their  name.     A  member  of  this  body  of  Homeridse 
was  probably  the  "blind  poet,"  who,  in  the  Homeric  Hymn  to  Apollo,  re 
lates  of  himself  that  he  dwelt  on  the  rocky  Chios,  and  whom  even  Thu- 
cydides  erroneously  took  for  Homer  himself. 

1  Ihne  (Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  Homerus),  p.  500.     Compare  Grote,  Hist,  fir.,  vol.  ii., 
p.  175,  seq.  2  Nitzsch,  Melet.  de  Histnr.  Horn.,  fasr.  ii.,  p.  2 ;  De  Hist.  Horn.,  p.  78. 

,  Anecd.  Gr.,vol.  ii.,  p.  768. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  27 

IV.  The  best  claim  seems  to  have  been  advanced  by  Smyrna,  and  the 
opinion  that  Homer  was  a  Smyrnaean  appears  to  have  been  the  prevalent 
one  in  the  flourishing  times  of  Greece.     It  is  also  adopted  by  the  gener 
ality  of  modern  scholars.1 

V.  Smyrna  was  founded  by  an  Ionian  colony  from  Ephesus,  or  from 
an  Ephesian  village  called  Smyrna.     These  lonians  were  followed,  and 
afterward  expelled,  by  ^Eolians  from  Cyme.     The  expelled  lonians  fled 
to  Colophon,  and  Smyrna  thus  became  ./Eolic.     Subsequently,  however, 
the  Colophonians  drove  out  the  ^Eolians  from  Smyrna,  w^hich  from  hence 
forth  was  a  purely  Ionic  city.     Now  the  JEolians  were  originally  in  pos 
session  of  the  traditions  of  the  Trojan  war>  which  their  ancestors  had 
waged,  and  in  which  no  lonians  had  taken  part.2     It  has  been  supposed, 
therefore,  and  with  no  small  degree  of  probability,  that  Homer,  himself 
an  Ionian,  and  belonging  to  one  of  the  families  which  went  from  Ephe 
sus  to  Smyrna,  received  these  traditions  from  the  JEolian  colonists  who 
came  to  Smyrna  after  the  lonians  had  settled  there,  and  who  subsequent 
ly,  as  above  remarked,  expelled  them  from  that  city ;   and  hence,  too, 
perhaps  we  may  explain  the  peculiarities  of  the  Homeric  dialect,  which 
is  different  from  the  pure  Ionic,  and  contains  a  large  mixture  of  JEolic 
elements. 

VI.  According  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  the  time  of  Homer  would 
fall  a  few  generations  after  the  Ionic  migration  to  Asia ;  and  with  this 
the  best  testimonies  of  antiquity  agree. 

VII.  The  parentage  also  of  Homer  is  involved  in  doubt.     According  to 
the  writer  of  the  Life  of  Homer,  falsely  attributed  to  Herodotus,3  the 
name  of  the  poet's  mother  was  Critheis,  and  he  was  born  on  the  banks 
of  the  Meles,  near  Smyrna,  from  which  circumstance  his  parent  gave  him 
the  name  of  Melesigenes  (MeATjoryc^s).     The  bard,  according  to  this  same 
authority,  was  of  illegitimate  origin.     These  and  various  other  particu 
lars  that  are  related  of  him  by  the  writer  of  the  life  in  question  are  equal 
ly  unworthy  of  belief.     Thus,  for  instance,  we  are  informed  that  Critheis 
subsequently  married  Phemius,  a  schoolmaster  of  Smyrna,  and  that,  on 
the  death  of  his  step-father,  Homer  succeeded  him  in  his  school,  and 
became  celebrated  for  his  wisdom.     He  subsequently  travelled  in  many 
countries,  and  in  the  course  of  his  wanderings  became  afflicted  with  total 
blindness.     Finally,  he  settled  at  Chios,  where  he  acquired  great  wealth 
by  reciting  his  poems.     He  died  at  the  island  of  los,  while  on  a  voyage 
to  Athens. 

VIII.  Whatever  credit,  however,  we  may  refuse  to  these  details,  it 
certainly  would  appear  from  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  that  Homer  had  actu 
ally  travelled  much,  and  that  in  the  course  of  his  travels  he  had  visited 
and  accurately  observed  all  the  principal  places  in  Greece. 

IX.  As  to  the  blindness  of  Homer,  no  one  need  extend  to  this  part  of 

i  Welcker,  Episch.  Cyclus,  vol.  i.,  p.  153;  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  41,  seqq. 

3  Miiller,  JEginet.,  p.  25  ;  Orchom.,  p.  367. 

3  There  are  many  lives  of  Homer,.all  of  which,  whatever  truth  is  mixed  up  with  them, 
derive  their  materials  from  early  legendary  history.  Two  of  these  are  attributed  to  Plu 
tarch.  The  one  ascribed  to  Herodotus,  however,  is  by  far  the  most  circumstantial. 


28  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

the  story  a  moment's  credence.  The  character  of  his  compositions,  as 
has  been  correctly  remarked,  seems  rather  to  suppose  him  all  eye  than 
destitute  of  sight ;  and  if  they  were  even  framed  during  his  blindness, 
they  form  a  glorious  proof  of  the  vivid  power  of  the  imagination,  more 
than  supplying  the  want  of  the  bodily  organs,  and  not  merely  throwing  a 
variety  of  its  own  tints  over  the  objects  of  nature,  but  presenting  them  to 
the  mind  in  a  clearer  light  than  could  be  shed  over  them  by  one  whose 
powers  of  immediate  vision  were  perfectly  free  from  blemish.1 

X.  The  name  of  Homer  ("O^pos)  is  supposed  by  many  not  to  have  been 
the  poet's  original  appellation,  but  to  have  been  given  to  him  to  denote 
some  quality  of  his  mind  or  incident  of  his  life.  Etymology  has,  there 
fore,  been  employed  to  develop  its  meaning,  in  the  hope  that  some  light 
might  thus  be  thrown  upon  his  history.  In  the  life  falsely  ascribed  to 
Herodotus,  he  is  said  to  have  been  called  Homer  ("O/j.-qpos')  from  his  blind 
ness,  the  term  tipripos,  in  the  Cumaean  dialect,  being  equivalent  to  the 
Attic  Tvcj)\6s.  According  to  others,  he  was  so  named  from  fynjpos,  "  a 
hostage,"  having  been  delivered  in  that  character  in  a  war  between 
Smyrna  and  Chios.  The  derivation  which  favors  the  theory  of  Wolf  (to 
which  we  shall  presently  refer)  is  from  6/j.ov,  "  together,"  and  &pu,  "  to 
fit."  This  etymology  proceeds  on  the  assumption  that  such  a  poet  as 
Homer  never  had  any  real  existence,  but  that  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  are 
merely  collections  of  rhapsodies  or  lays  by  different  bards,  united  into 
two  large  poems. 

II.    PRODUCTIONS     OF     HOMER.2 

XL  This  Homer,  then  (of  the  circumstances  of  whose  life  we  know 
so  little),  was  the  one  who  gave  epic  poetry  its  first  great  impulse.  Be 
fore  his  time,  in  general,  only  single  actions  and  adventures  were  cele 
brated  in  short  lays,  such  as,  in  later  times,  were  produced  by  several 
poets  of  the  school  of  Hesiod.  Occasionally,  if  it  was  desired,  a  longer 
series  of  adventures  of  the  same  hero  was  formed  from  these,  but  they 
always  remained  a  collection  of  independent  poems  on  the  same  subject, 
and  never  attained  to  that  unity  of  character  and  composition  which  con 
stitutes  one  poem.  It  was  an  entirely  new  phenomenon,  therefore,  which 
could  not  fail  to  make  the  greatest  impression,  when  a  Homer  selected 
a  subject  of  the  heroic  tradition,  which  had  in  itself  the  means  of  awak 
ening  a  lively  interest,  and  of  satisfying  the  mind ;  and  which,  at  the 
same  time,  admitted  of  such  a  development  that  the  principal  personages 
could  be  represented  as  acting  each  with  a  peculiar  and  individual  char 
acter,  without  obscuring  the  chief  hero  and  the  main  action  of  the  poem. 

XII.  One  legendary  subject  of  this  extent  and  interest  Homer  found 
in  the  anger  of  Achilles,  and  another  in  the  return  of  Ulysses ;  the  first 
producing  the  ILIAD,  and  the  second  the  ODYSSEY. 

ILIAD. — SKETCH    OF    THE    POEM.3 

XIII.  The  Iliad  ('IXids,  soil,  iroiijffis),  or  Poem  of  Troy,  consists  of  24 

1  Talfourd,  Early  Greek  Poetry,  p.  36.  2  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  47,  srtjq. 

3  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  268,  seqq. 


POETICAL    PERIOD. 


29 


books,  and  contains,  strictly  speaking,  a  simple  episode  of  the  Trojan 
war.  The  poet  sings  of  the  events  which  took  place  during  the  compass 
of  fifty-one  days,  from  the  quarrel  between  Agamemnon  and  Achilles  to 
the  obsequies  of  Hector. 

XIV.  From  the  notices  interspersed  throughout  the  poem,  it  appears 
that  the  first  nine  years  of  the  siege  of  Troy  had  passed  without  any 
event  of  a  decisive  character.     After  a  vigorous  attempt  to  frustrate  the 
landing  of  the  Greeks,  the  Trojans,  unable  to  cope  with  them  in  the  field, 
shut  themselves  up  within  the  walls  of  the  city,  where,  by  the  strength 
of  its  fortifications,  they  baffled  every  assault  of  the  enemy.1    The  Greeks 
naturally  shaped  their  tactics  by  those  of  the  besieged,  and,  in  order  to 
wear  out  their  resources,  occupied  themselves  in  ravaging  the  country, 
and  reducing  other  cities  of  the  hostile  confederacy.2 

XV.  In  the  tenth  year,  however,  events  occurred  to  alter  the  Trojan 
policy.     Dissensions  between  Agamemnon  and  Achilles,  the  hero  on 
whose  valor  the  Greeks  mainly  relied  for  success,  caused  the  secession 
of  the  latter.     In  proportion  as  this  event  tended  to  discourage  the  one 
party,  already  somewhat  disheartened  by  a  long  and  unprofitable  warfare, 
it  revived  the  hopes  of  the  other.     The  city  was  at  this  epoch  crowded 
with  Asiatic  auxiliaries,  who,  however  valuable  their  services,  pressed 
heavily  on  the  resources  of  Priam,3  and  rendered  some  desperate  effort 
the  more  indispensable. 

XVI.  Such  a  combination  of  circumstances  obviously  marked  out  this 
as  the  moment  for  a  bold  attack  on  the  invaders.     The  quarrel,  therefore, 
between  the  chiefs,  as  the  immediate  cause  of  a  change  in  the  languid 
character  of  the  war,  and  of  a  series  of  fierce  engagements,  involving  the 
death  of  Hector,  the  main  bulwark  of  his  country,  but,  above  all,  from 
the  fine  field  it  afforded  for  developing  the  character  of  Achilles,  the  heart 
and  soul  of  the  Iliad,  could  not  fail  to  offer  itself  to  the  genius  of  Homer 
as  the  centre  or  pivot  of  action  in  any  poem  founded  on  the  siege  of  Troy. 

XVII.  Nor  does  the  peculiar  nature  of  these  events  mark  out  the  com 
pletion  of  the  design  less  clearly  than  its  commencement.     From  the 
quarrel  of  the  heroes  down  to  the  restoration  of  Hector's  body,  the  whole 
series  of  occurrences  follow  each  other  by  a  constant  chain  of  cause  and 
effect.     On  the  withdrawal  of  Achilles  depend  the  unwonted  boldness 
and  success  of  the  Trojans.    The  disasters  of  the  Greeks  excite  the  sym 
pathy  of  Patroclus,  whose  successful  mediation  with  Achilles  leads  to  his 
own  death  by  the  hand  of  Hector.     Grief,  anger,  and  remorse  procure 
the  immediate  restoration  of  Achilles  to  the  field,  and  the  infliction  of 
death  on  the  destroyer  of  his  friend.     The  duties  of  friendship  and  of 
religion  indispensably  require  a  performance  of  the  last  honors  to  the  re 
mains  of  the  two  fallen  warriors,  and  with  this  the  poem  concludes. 

ODYSSEY. — SKETCH    OF    THE    POEM.4 

XVIII.  The  Odyssey  ('OStWeia,  soil.  iroiijffis),  also  in  24  books,  recounts 
the  adventures  of  Ulysses  ('OStxnrevs)  returning  to  his  island  home  from 

1  /Z.,viii.,  5,  &c.  2  Jd.,  ix.,  328. 

3  Id.,  ii.,  130 ;  xvii.,  220 ;  xviii.,  288,  seqq.  *  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  57,  seqq. 


30  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Troy.  It  is  indisputably,  as  well  as  the  Iliad,  a  poem  possessing  a  unity 
of  subject  ;  nor  can  any  one  of  its  chief  parts  be  removed  without  leav 
ing  a  chasm  in  the  development  of  the  leading  idea  ;  but  it  differs  from 
the  Iliad  in  being  composed  on  a  more  artificial  and  more  complicated  plan. 
This  is  the  case,  partly  because,  in  the  first  and  greater  half,  up  to  the 
sixteenth  book,  two  main  actions  are  carried  on  side  by  side  ;  partly  be 
cause  the  action,  which  passes  within  the  compass  of  the  poem,  and,  as 
it  were,  beneath  our  eyes,  is  greatly  extended  by  means  of  an  episodical 
narration,  by  which  the  chief  action  itself  is  made  distinct  and  complete, 
and  the  most  marvellous  and  the  strangest  part  of  the  story  is  transferred 
from  the  mouth  of  the  poet  to  that  of  the  inventive  hero  himself. 

XIX.  The  subject  of  the  Odyssey  is  the  return  of  Ulysses  from  a  land 
lying  beyond  the  range  of  human  intercourse  or  knowledge,  to  a  home  in 
vaded  by  bands  of  insolent  intruders,  wrho  seek  to  rob  him  of  his  wife  and 
to  kill  his  son.     Hence  the  Odyssey  begins  exactly  at  that  point  where  the 
hero  is  considered  to  be  farthest  from  his  home,  in  the  island  of  Ogygia,1 
at  the  navel,  that  is,  the  central  point  of  the  sea,  where  the  nymph  Calyp 
so  (KaAv^cS,  "  the  concealer")  has  kept  him  hidden  from  all  mankind  for 
seven  years.     Thence  having,  by  the  help  of  the  gods,  who  pity  his  mis 
fortunes,  passed  through  the  dangers  prepared  for  him  by  his  implacable 
enemy,  Neptune,  he  gains  the  land  of  the  Phaeacians,  a  careless,  peace 
able,  and  effeminate  nation  on  the  confines  of  the  earth,  to  whom  war  is 
only  known  by  means  of  poetry. 

XX.  Borne  by  a  marvellous  Phaeacian  vessel,  he  reaches  Ithaca  sleep 
ing  ;  here  he  is  entertained  by  the  honest  swineherd  Eumaeus,  and  hav 
ing  been  introduced  into  his  own  house  as  a  beggar,  he  is  there  made  to 
suffer  the  harshest  treatment  from  the  suitors,  in  order  that  he  may  after 
ward  appear  with  the  stronger  right  as  a  terrible  avenger. 

XXI.  With  this  simple  story  a  poet  might  have  been  satisfied,  and  we 
should  even  in  this  form,  notwithstanding  its  smaller  extent,  have  placed 
the  poem  almost  on  an  equality  with  the  Iliad.    But  the  poet  to  whom  we 
are  indebted  for  the  Odyssey  in  its  complete  form  has  interwoven  a  second 
story,  by  which  the  poem  is  rendered  much  richer  and  more  complete  ; 
although,  indeed,  from  the  union  of  two  actions,  some  roughnesses  have 
been  produced,  which,  perhaps,  with  a  plan  of  this  kind,  could  scarcely  be 
avoided  ;  for,  while  the  poet  represents  the  son  of  Ulysses,  stimulated  by 
Minerva,  coming  forward  in  Ithaca  with  newly-excited  courage,  and  call 
ing  the  suitors  to  account  before  the  people,  and  then  afterward  describes 
him  as  travelling  to  Pylos  and  Sparta  to  obtain  information  of  his  lost  fa 
ther,  he  gives  us  a  picture  of  Ithaca  and  its  anarchical  condition,  and  of 
the  rest  of  Greece  in  its  state  of  peace  after  the  return  of  the  princes, 
which  produces  the  finest  contrast,  and,  at  the  same  time,  prepares  Telem- 
achus  for  playing  an  energetic  part  in  the  work  of  vengeance,  which  by 
this  means  becomes  more  probable.2 


ia,  from  'ftyv'yrjs,  who  was  originally  a  deity  of  the  watery  expanse  which  cov 
ered  all  things.  2  Mutter,  I.  c. 


POETI»CAL     PERIOD.  31 


CHAPTER  V. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 
HOMERIC     CONTROVERSY.1 

I.  THE  whole  of  antiquity  unanimously  viewed  the  Iliad  and  the  Odys 
sey  as  the  productions  of  a  certain  individual  called  Homer.     No  doubt 
of  this  fact  ever  entered  the  mind  of  any  of  the  ancients ;  and  even  a 
large  number  of  other  poems  were  attributed  to  the  same  author.     This 
opinion  continued  unshaken  down  to  the  year  1795  of  our  era,  when  Wolf 
wrote  his  famous  Prolegomena,  in  which  he  endeavored  to  show  that  the 
Iliad  and  Odyssey  were  not  two  complete  poems,  but  small,  separate,  in 
dependent  epic  songs,  celebrating  single  exploits  of  the  heroes,  and  that 
these  lays  were  for  the  first  time  written  down  and  united,  as  the  Iliad  and 
Odyssey,  by  Pisistratus,  tyrant  of  Athens. 

II.  This  opinion,  however,  startling  and  paradoxical  as  it  seemed,  was 
not  entirely  new.     Casaubon  had  already  doubted  the  common  belief  re 
specting  Homer,  and  the  great  Bentley  had  said  expressly  that  "  Homer 
wrote  a  sequel  of  songs  and  rhapsodies.    These  loose  songs  were  not  col 
lected  together  in  the  form  of  an  epic  poem  till  about  500  years  after."8 
Some  French  writers,  Perault  and  Hedelin,  and  the  Italian  Vico,  had 
made  similar  conjectures,  but  aU  these  were  forgotten,  and  overborne  by 
the  common  and  general  opinion,  and  the  more  easily,  since  th-se  bold 
conjectures  had  been  thrown  out  almost  at  hazard,  and  without  sound  ar 
guments  to  support  them. 

III.  When,  therefore,  Wolf's  Prolegomena  appeared,  the  whole  literary 
world  was  startled  by  the  boldness  and  novelty  of  his  positions,  and  great 
opposition  was,  of  course,  excited.     The  publication  of  his  work  took 
place  during  a  crisis  in  the  intellectual  as  well  as  the  political  destinies 
of  Europe.    A  bold  spirit  of  speculative  inquiry  was  then  abroad,  the  valu 
able  effects  of  which,  in  exploding  error  and  prejudice,  have  been  too 
often  counterbalanced  by  the  spread  of  groundless  or  mischievous  innova 
tion.     Wolf  himself  professed  the  scope  of  his  argument  to  be  rather  to 
subvert  the  ancient  fabric  of  opinion,  than  to  erect  any  solid  edifice  in  its 
place.     The  result,  however,  has  not  fully  justified  the  accuracy  of  the 
figure  ;  for,  while  no  one  has  to  this  day  been  able  to  refute  some  of  the 
principal  arguments  of  the  great  critic,  and  to  re-establish  fully  the  old 
opinion  which  he  overthrew,  yet  his  views  have  been  materially  modified 
by  protracted  discussions,  and  a  considerable  portion  of  the  old  way  of 
thinking  has  been  revived. 

IV.  We  wiU  first  state  Wolf's  principal  arguments,  and  the  chief  ob 
jections  of  his  opponents,  and  will  then  endeavor  to  discover  the  most 
probable  result  of  all  these  inquiries. 

1  Ihne  (Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  Homerus),  p.  501,  seqq. 

2  Letter  by  Philehutkmis  Lipsiensis,  t)  7. 


32  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

In  1770,  Wood  published  a  book  On  the  Original  Genius  of  Homer1  in 
which  he  mooted  the  question  whether  the  Homeric  poems  had  originally 
been  written  or  not.  This  idea  was  caught  up  by  WTolf,  and  proved  the 
foundation  of  all  his  inquiries.  But  the  most  important  assistance  which 
he  obtained  was  from  the  discovery  and  publication  by  Villoison,  in  1788, 
of  the  famous  Venetian  scholia  on  Homer.  These  valuable  scholia,  in 
giving  us  some  insight  into  the  studies  of  the  Alexandrine  critics,  fur 
nished  materials  and  an  historical  basis  for  Wolf's  inquiries. 

WOLF'S    FIRST    ARGUMENT.2 

V.  The  point  from  which  Wolf  started  was,  as  we  have  said,  the  idea 
that  the  Homeric  poems  were  originally  not  written.     To  prove  this,  he 
enters  into  a  minute  and  accurate  discussion  concerning  the  age  of  the 
art  of  writing.     He  sets  aside  as  groundless  fables  the  traditions  which 
ascribed  the  invention  or  introduction  of  this  art  to  Cadmus,  Cecrops, 
Orpheus,  Linus,  or  Palamedes.     Then,  allowing  that  letters  were  known 
in  Greece  at  a  very  early  period,  he  justly  insists  upon  the  great  difference 
which  exists  between  the  knowledge  of  the  letters  and  their  general  use 
for  works  of  literature.    Writing  is  first  applied  to  public  monuments,  in 
scriptions,  and  religious  purposes,  centuries  before  it  is  employed  for  the 
common  purposes  of  social  life.    This  is  still  more  certain  to  be  the  case 
when  the  common  ordinary  materials  for  writing  are  wanting,  as  they 
were  among  the  ancient  Greeks.     Wood,  lead,  brass,  and  stone  are  not 
proper  materials  for  writing  down  poems  consisting  of  24  books.     Even 
hides,  which  were  used  by  the  lonians,  seem  too  clumsy  for  this  purpose, 
and,  besides,  we  do  not  know  when  they  were  first  in  use. 

VI.  It  was  not,  according  to  Wolf,  before  the  sixth  century  B.C.  that 
papyrus  became  easily  accessible  to  the  Greeks,  through  King  Amasis, 
who  first  opened  Egypt  to  Greek  traders.     The  laws  of  Lycurgus  were 
not  committed  to  writing ;  those  of  Zaleucus,  among  the  Locri  Epizephy- 
rii,  in  the  29th  Olympiad,  or  664  B.C.,  are  particularly  recorded  as  the 
first  laws  that  were  ever  written  down.3     The  laws  of  Solon,  seventy 
years  later,  were  written  on  wood,  and  after  the  fashion  called 


VII.  Wolf  allows  that  all  these  considerations  do  not  prove  that  no  use 
at  all  was  made  of  the  art  of  writing  as  early  as  the  seventh  and  eighth 
centuries  B.C.,  which  would  be  particularly  improbable  in  the  case  of  the 
lyric  poets,  such  as  Archilochus,  Alcman,  Pisander,  and  Arion,  but  that 
before  the  time  of  the  seven  sages,  that  is,  the  time  when  prose  writing 
first  originated,  the  art  was  not  so  common  that  we  can  suppose  it  to 
have  been  employed  for  such  extensive  works  as  the  poems  of  Homer. 
Wolf  refers,  in  support  of  his  position,  to  the  testimony  of  Josephus,4  and 
to  a  scholiast  cited  by  Villoison  in  his  Anecdota.5 

i  "  An  Essay  on  the  Original  Genius  and  Writings  of  Homer,"  &c.    Lond.,  1775,  4to. 

3  Ihne>  P-  50L  3  Scymn.  Perieg.,  313  ;  Strab.,  vi.,  p.  259. 

_     C.  Apion.,  i.,  2  :  'Oi/>e  Ka\  ^6\^  Syvuxrw  oL  "EAA^es  <t>v<rw  ypa^druv Kai  ejWiv 

ovSe  TOVTOV  ji.  e.,  'Ompov)  iv  yp^ao-i  TTJV  avrov  no^nv  Kara^irelv,  a\\a  Stawfiovcv 
o/xei/Tji/  CK  TWI<  (xVaiw  {Jorepoi/  onwTefljrac.       *  Schol.  ap.  Villois.,  Anecd.  Gr.,  ii.,  p.  182. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  33 

VIII.  But  Wolf  draws  still  more  convincing  proofs  from  the  poems 
themselves.  In  the  seventh  book  of  the  Iliad  (v.  175),  the  Grecian  heroes 
decide  by  lot  who  is  to  fight  with  Hector.  The  lots  are  marked  by  each 
respective  hero,  and  are  all  thrown  into  a  helmet,  which  is  shaken  until 
one  lot  is  jerked  out.  This  is  handed  round  by  the  herald  till  it  reaches 
Ajax,  who  recognizes  the  mark  he  had  made  on  it  as  his  own.  If  this 
mark  had  been  any  thing  like  writing,  the  herald  would  have  read  it  at 
once,  and  not  have  handed  it  round.  Again,  in  the  sixth  book  of  the  Iliad 
(v.  168,  seqq.)  we  have  the  story  of  Bellerophon,  whom  Prcetus  sends  to 
Lycia, 

Tropev  8"  6ye  oTj/naTa  Avypa, 
ypa\}/as  ev  irivaKi  TTTV/CTU)  6v/u.o$06pa  TroAAa, 
Set£cu  d'  r)V<ayei.  cp  TrevBepw,  6<|>p'  a;r6A<HTO. 


Wolf  here  shows  that  O^/AUTO  \vypa.  are  a  kind  of  conventional  marks, 
and  not  letters,  and  that  this  story  is  far  from  proving  the  existence  of 
writing. 

IX.  Throughout  the  whole  of  Homer,  indeed,  remarks  Wolf,  every  thing 
is  calculated  to  be  heard,  nothing  to  be  read.     Not  a  single  epitaph,  nor 
any  other  inscription,  is  mentioned  ;  the  tombs  of  the  heroes  are  rude 
mounds  ;  coins  are  unknown.     In  the  eighth  book  of  the  Odyssey  (v.  163, 
seqq.)  an  overseer  of  a  ship  is  mentioned,  who,  instead  of  having  a  list  of 
the  cargo,  must  remember  it  ;  he  is  (f)6prov  ^.v^wv.    All  this  seems  to 
prove,  according  to  Wolf,  without  the  possibility  of  doubt,  that  the  art  of 
writing  was  entirely  unknown  at  the  time  of  the  Trojan  war,  and  could 
not  have  been  common  at  the  time  when  the  poems  were  composed. 

ANSWER    TO    WOLF'S    FIRST    ARGUMENT,   WITH    REMARKS. 

X.  Among  the  opponents  of  Wolf,  there  is  none  superior  to  Nitzsch  in 
zeal,  perseverance,  learning,  and  acuteness.    He  wrote  a  series  of  mono- 
graphies1  to  refute  Wolf  and  his  supporters,  and  he  has  done  a  great  deal 
toward  establishing  a  solid  and  well-founded  view  of  this  complicated 
question.     Next  to  Nitzsch  may  be  mentioned  Kreuser,  Clinton,  and 
Thirlwall. 

XI.  Nitzsch  opposes  Wolf's  conclusions  concerning  the  later  date  of 
written  documents.     He  denies  that  the  laws  of  Lycurgus  were  trans 
mitted  by  oral  tradition  alone,  and  were  for  this  purpose  set  to  music  by 
Terpander  and  Thaletas,  as  is  generally  believed,  on  the  authority  of  Plu 
tarch.2    The  Spartan  v6/j.oi,  which  those  two  musicians  are  said  to  have 
composed,  Nitzsch  declares  to  have  been  hymns,  and  not  laws,  although 
Strabo  calls  Thaletas  a  j/o/ioflertKby  avrjp  (by  a  mistake,  as  Nitzsch  ventures 
to  say  !).     Clinton  also  remarks,  that  it  wrould  have  been  an  unnecessary 
provision  for  Lycurgus  to  have  enacted  that  his  laws  should  not  be  com 
mitted  to  writing,  if  writing  had  not  been  practiced. 

XII.  In  answer  to  Strabo's  statement,  as  quoted  by  Wolf,  that  the 
Epizephyrian  Locrians  were  the  first  Greek  people  that  received  a  code 

1  Qucestion.  Homeric.  Specim.,  i.,  1824;  Indaganda  per  Odyss.  Interpolntionis  Prcepara- 
tio,  1828;  De  Hist.  Homeri,  fascic.  i.,  1830;  De  Aristotele  contra  Wolfianos,  1831  ;  Patria 
et  Miaa  Homeri,  1834.  2  De  Mus.,  3. 


34  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

of  written  laws,  Nitzsch  gives  a  different  explanation  of  Strabo's  mean 
ing,  and  maintains  that  the  point  in  which  the  novelty  consisted  was,  not 
that  the  laws  were  reduced  to  writing,  but  that  the  discretion  of  the  Lo- 
crian  magistrates  was  limited  by  a  penal  code. 

XIII.  To  Wolf's  argument,  drawn  from  Bellerophon's  ar]/j.ara  \vypd,  no 
satisfactory  answer  has  ever  been  given,  though  this  has  been  attempted 
by  Nitzsch,  Kreuser,  Thirlwall,  and  many  others.     Writing  materials, 
however,  were,  according  to  Nitzsch,  not  wanting  at  a  very  early  period. 
He  maintains  that  wooden  tablets  and  the  hides  (8t$Mpat)  of  the  lonians 
were  employed,  and  that  even  papyrus  was  known  and  used  by  the  Greeks 
long  before  the  time  of  Amasis,  and  was  brought  into  Greece  by  Phoeni 
cian  merchants.     Amasis,  according  to  Nitzsch,  only  rendered  the  use 
of  papyrus  more  general  (sixth  century  B.C),  whereas  previously  its  use 
had  been  confined  to  a  few. 

XIV.  Thus  Nitzsch  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  writing  was  common 
in  Greece  full  one  hundred  years  before  the  time  which  Wolf  had  sup 
posed,  namely,  about  the  beginning  of  the  Olympiads  (eighth  century  B.C.), 
and  that  this  is  the  time  in  which  the  Homeric  poems  were  committed  to 
writing.     Even  if  this  is  granted,  however,  it  does  not  follow  that  the 
poems  were  also  composed  at  that  time.     Nitzsch  can  not  prove  that  the 
age  of  Homer  was  so  late  as  the  eighth  century.     The  best  authorities 
place  Homer  much  earlier,  so  that  we  again  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
the  Homeric  poems  were  composed  and  handed  down  for  a  long  time 
without  the  assistance  of  writing.    In  fact,  this  point  seems  indisputable. 
The  nature  of  the  Homeric  language  is  alone  a  sufficient  argument,  but 
into  this  consideration  Nitzsch  never  entered.1     The  Homeric  dialect 
could  never  have  attained  to  the  softness  and  flexibility  which  render  it 
so  well  adapted  to  versification — that  variety  of  longer  and  shorter  forms, 
which  existed  together — that  freedom  in  contracting  and  resolving  vow 
els,  and  of  forming  the  contractions  into  two  syllables — if  the  practice  of 
writing  had  at  that  time  exercised  the  power,  which  it  naturally  possesses, 
of  fixing  the  forms  of  a  language.8 

XV.  Moreover,  the  state  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  in  respect  to  the  let 
ter  called  the  digamma  affords  a  proof  that  they  were  recited  for  a  con 
siderable  period  before  they  were  committed  to  writing,  insomuch  that 
the  oral  pronunciation  underwent  during  the  interval  a  sensible  change. 
At  the  time  when  these  poems  were  composed,  the  digamma  was  an 
effective  consonant,  and  figured  as  such  in  the  structure  of  the  verse ;  at 
the  time,  however,  when  they  were  committed  to  writing,  it  had  ceased 
to  be  pronounced,  and  therefore  never  found  a  place  in  any  of  the  manu 
scripts,  insomuch  that  the  Alexandrine  critics,  though  they  knew  of  its 
existence  in  the  much  later  poems  of  Alcseus  and  Sappho,  never  recog 
nized  it  in  Homer.     The  hiatus,  and  the  various  perplexities  of  metre, 
occasioned  by  the  loss  of  the  digamma,  were  corrected  by  different  gram 
matical  stratagems  ;  but  the  whole  history  of  this  lost  letter  is  very  cu 
rious,  and  is  rendered  intelligible  only  by  the  supposition  that  the  Iliad 

1  Hermann,  Opusc.,  vi.,  1,  75  ;  Giese,  d.  Mol.  Dialect.,  p.  154. 
=  Mutter,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  38. 


POETIC  AL    PERIOD.  35 

and  Odyssey  belonged  for  a  wide  space  of  time  to  the  memory,  the  voice, 
and  the  ear  exclusively.1 

XVI.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  to  admit  Wolf's  first  position,  that  the 
Homeric  poems  were  originally  not  committed  to  writing.     We  now  pro 
ceed  to  examine  the  conclusions  which  he  draws  from  these  premises, 
regarding  them,  for  convenience'  sake,  as  so  many  successive  arguments. 

WOLF'S  SECOND  ARGUMENT,  WITH  AN  ANSWER  TO  THE  SAME. 

XVII.  However  great  the  genius  of  Homer  may  have  been,  says  Wolf, 
it  is  quite  incredible  that,  without  the  assistance  of  writing,  he  could  have 
conceived  in  his  mind  and  executed  such  extensive  works. 

XVIII.  But  it  is  difficult  to  determine,  as  Miiller  remarks  in  reply  to  this 
argument,2  how  many  thousand  verses  a  person  thoroughly  impregnated 
with  his  subject,  and  absorbed  in  the  contemplation  of  it,  might  produce 
in  a  year,  and  confide  to  the  faithful  memory  of  disciples  devoted  to  their 
master  and  his  art.     We  have  instances  of  modern  poets  who  have  com 
posed  long  poems  without  writing  down  a  single  syllable,  and  have  pre 
served  them  faithfully  in  their  memory,  before  committing  them  to  writ 
ing.     And  how  much  more  easily  could  this  have  been  done  in  the  time 
anterior  to  the  use  of  writing,  when  all  those  faculties  of  the  mind,  which 
had  to  dispense  with  this  artificial  assistance,  were  powerfully  developed, 
trained,  and  exercised. 

XIX.  Again,  we  must  not  look  upon  the  old  bards  as  amateurs,  who 
amused  themselves  in  leisure  hours  with  poetical  compositions,  as  is  the 
fashion  nowadays.     Composition  was  their  profession.     All  their  thoughts 
were  concentrated  on  this  one  point,  in  which  and  for  which  they  lived. 
Their  composition  was,  moreover,  facilitated  by  their  having  no  occasion 
to  invent  complicated  plots  and  wonderful  stories  ;  the  simple  traditions, 
on  which  they  founded  their  songs,  were  handed  down  to  them  in  a  form 
already  adapted  to  poetical  purposes.     If  now,  in  spite  of  all  these  ad 
vantages,  the  composition  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  was  no  easy  task,  we 
must  attribute  some  superiority  to  the  genius  of  Homer,  which  caused  his 
name  and  his  works  to  acquire  eternal  glory,  and  covered  all  his  innumer 
able  predecessors,  contemporaries,  and  followers  with  oblivion.3 

WOLF'S  THIRD  ARGUMENT,  WITH  AN  ANSWER  TO  THE  SAME. 

XX.  Wolfs  third  argument,  or  second  deduction  from  his  main  prem 
ises,  is  of  more  weight  and  importance.     When  people  neither  wrote  nor 
read,  the  only  way  of  publishing  poems  was  by  oral  recitation.    The  bards, 
therefore,  of  the  Heroic  Age,  as  we  see  from  Homer  himself,  used  to  en 
tertain  their  hearers  at  banquets,  festivals,  and  on  similar  occasions.    At 
such  times  they  certainly  could  not  recite  more  than  one  or  two  rhap 
sodies  or  books.     Now  WTolf  asks  what  could  have  induced  any  one  to 
compose  a  poem  of  such  a  length  that  it  could  not  be  heard  all  at  once. 

XXI.  To  refute  this  argument,  the  opponents  of  Wolf  were  obliged  to 
seek  for  occasions  which  afforded  at  least  a  possibility  of  reciting  the 

1  Grote,  Hint,  of  Greece,  vol.  ii.,  p.  190.  seq.  =  MitUer,  Hist.  Gr,  Lit.,  p.  62. 

3  I  fine,  p.  502. 


36  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

whole  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey.  Banquets  and  small  festivals  were  not 
sufficient ;  but  there  were  musical  contests  (aywves),  connected  with  great 
national  festivals,  at  which  thousands  assembled,  anxious  to  hear  and  pa 
tient  to  listen.  If,  says  Miiller,1  the  Athenians  could  at  one  festival  hear 
in  succession  nine  tragedies,  three  satyric  dramas,  and  as  many  comedies, 
without  ever  thinking  that  it  might  be  better  to  distribute  this  enjoyment 
over  the  whole  year,  why  should  not  the  Greeks  of  earlier  times  have  been 
able  to  listen  to  the  whole  Iliad  and  Odyssey,  and  perhaps  other  poems, 
at  the  same  festival.  Such  occasions,  we  know,  did  occur  at  the  Pan- 
ionian  festival,  where  poetical  contests  of  the  bards  were  held  ;  at  Sicyon, 
during  the  contests  of  the  rhapsodists  in  the  time  of  Clisthenes  ;  and  also 
in  many  other  parts  of  Greece.2 

XXII.  Besides,  it  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  theory,  that  each  of  these 
poems  was  composed  with  a  unity  of  subject  and  design,  to  suppose  that 
some  of  the  parts  or  episodes  might  have  been  recited  separately ;  that 
the  plan  of  the  whole,  and  the  gradual  unfolding  of  the  story,  should  be  so 
well  known,  from  familiarit}r  with  it,  that  the  hearers  could  delight  in  the 
recitation  of  a  part,  and  their  imaginations  readily  place  and  arrange  it  in 
the  frame-work  which  fully  occupied  their  minds.     In  later  times,  it  was 
essential  to  the  idea  of  Greek  tragedy  that  the  histories  which  the  poet 
developed  should  be  well  known  to  the  audience,  and  this  probably  was 
the  case  with  the  legends  of  the  Trojan  war,  which  were  the  original 
foundation  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey.3 

XXIII.  Again,  to  refer,  by  way  of  illustration,  to  the  habits  of  modern 
times,  the  popularity  of  those  works  of  fiction,  which  are  periodically  pub 
lished  in  parts,  shows  that,  even  with  long  intervals  between  the  publica 
tion  of  the  parts,  it  is  possible  to  sustain  the  interest  of  a  tale,  and  to  keep 
awake  the  attention  of  the  reader.     In  the  same  manner,  those  who  list 
ened  to  the  divine  poems  of  Homer  might  have  been  delighted  to  receive, 
book  by  book,  his  inspired  strains.* 

WOLF'S  FOURTH  ARGUMENT,5  WITH  AN  ANSWER  TO  THE  SAME. 

XXIV.  Wolf  observes  that  Aristotle  first  derived  the  laws  of  epic  poet 
ry  from  the  examples  which  he  found  laid  down  in  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey. 
It  was  for  this  reason,  says  Wolf,  that  people  never  thought  of  suspecting 
that  those  examples  themselves  were  destitute  of  that  poetic  unity  which 
Aristotle,  from  a  contemplation  of  them,  drew  up  as  a  principal  requisite 
for  this  kind  of  poetry.     It  was  transmitted,  says  Wolf,  by  old  traditions, 
how  once  Achilles  withdrew  from  the  battle  ;  how,  in  consequence  of  the 
absence  of  the  great  hero,  who  alone  awed  the  Trojans,  the  Greeks  were 
worsted  ;  how  Achilles  at  last  allowed  his  friend  Patroclus  to  protect  the 
Greeks ;  and  how,  finally,  he  avenged  the  death  of  Patroclus  by  killing 
Hector. 

XXV.  This  simple  course  of  the  story,  Wolf  thinks,  would  have  been 
treated  by  any  other  poet  in  very  much  the  same  manner  as  we  now  read 
it  in  the  Iliad ;  and  he  maintains  that  there  is  no  unity  in  it,  except  a 

1  Milller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  62.  2  Browne,  Hist.  Class.  Lit.,  vol.  i.,  p.  48. 

a  Id.  ,l.c.  *  Id.  .I.e.  5  Ihne ,  p.  503. 


POETICAL    PERIOD. 


37 


chronological  one,  in  so  far  as  we  have  a  narration  of  the  events  of  sev 
eral  days  in  succession.  Nay,  he  continues,  if  we  examine  closely  the 
last  six  books,  we  shall  find  that  they  have  nothing  to  do  with  what  is 
stated  in  the  introduction  as  the  object  of  the  poem,  namely, the  wrath  of 
Achilles.  This  wrath  subsides  with  the  death  of  Patroclus,  and  what  fol 
lows  is  a  wrath  of  a  different  kind,  which  does  not  belong  to  the  former. 

XXVI.  The  composition  of  the  Odyssey  is  not  viewed  with  any  greater 
favor  by  Wolf.    The  journey  of  Telemachus  to  Pylos  and  Sparta,  the  so 
journ  of  Ulysses  in  the  island  of  Calypso,  the  stories  of  his  wanderings, 
were  originally,  according  to  him,  independent  songs,  which,  as  they  hap 
pened  to  fit  into  one  another,  were  afterward  connected  into  one  whole,  at 
a  time  when  literature,  the  arts,  and  a  general  cultivation  of  the  mind  be 
gan  to  flourish  in  Greece,  supported  by  the  important  art  of  writing. 

XXVII.  These  bold  speculations  of  Wolf  have  met  with  almost  uni 
versal  disapprobation.     Still,  this  is  a  subject  on  which  reasoning  and 
demonstration  are  very  precarious  and  almost  impossible.     The  feelings 
and  tastes  of  every  individual  must  determine  the  matter.    But  to  oppose 
to  Wolf's  skeptical  views  the  judgment  of  a  man  whose  authority  on  mat 
ters  of  taste  is  as  great  as  on  those  of  learning,  we  proceed  to  give  what 
Miiller  says  on  this  same  subject. 

REMARKS    OF    MULLER    ON    THE    UNITY    OF    THE    ILIAD.1 

XXVIII.  All  the  laws  which  reflection  and  experience  can  suggest  for 
the  epic  form  are  observed  in  Homer  with  the  most  refined  taste  ;  all  the 
means  are  employed  by  which  the  general  effect  can  be  heightened. 

XXIX.  The  anger  of  Achilles  is  an  event  which  did  not  long  precede 
the  final  destruction  of  Troy,  inasmuch  as  it  produced  the  death  of  Hector, 
who  was  the  defender  of  the  city.    It  was,  doubtless,  the  ancient  tradition, 
established  long  before  Homer's  time,  that  Hector  had  been  slain  by  Achil 
les  in  revenge  for  the  slaughter  of  his  friend  Patroclus,  whose  fall  in  battle, 
unprotected  by  the  son  of  Thetis,  was  explained  by  the  tradition  to  have 
arisen  from  the  anger  of  Achilles  against  the  other  Greeks  for  an  affront 
offered  to  him,  and  his  consequent  retirement  from  the  contest.     Now 
the  poet  seizes,  as  the  most  critical  and  momentous  period  of  the  action, 
the  conversion  of  Achilles  from  the  foe  of  the  Greeks  into  that  of  the 
Trojans  ;  for  as,  on  the  one  hand,  the  sudden  revolution  in  the  fortunes 
of  war,  thus  occasioned,  places  the  prowess  of  Achilles  in  the  strongest 
light,  so,  on  the  other  hand,  the  change  of  his  firm  and  resolute  mind 
must  have  been  the  more  touching  to  the  feelings  of  the  hearers. 

XXX.  From  this  centre  of  interest  there  springs  a  long  preparation 
and  gradual  development,  since  not  only  the  cause  of  the  anger  of  Achilles, 
but  also  the  defeats  of  the  Greeks,  occasioned  by  that  anger,  were  to  be 
narrated ;  and  the  display  of  the  insufficiency  of  all  the  other  heroes,  at 
the  same  time,  offered  the  best  opportunity  for  exhibiting  their  several 
excellencies      It  is  in  the  arrangement  of  this  preparatory  part,  and  its 
connection  with  the  catastrophe,  that  the  poet  displays  his  perfect  ac- 
quaintance  with  all  the  mysteries  of  poetical  composition ;  and  in  his  con- 

1   flutter,  Hist,  Gr.  Lit  ,  p.  48 


38  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

tinual  postponement  of  the  crisis  of  the  action,  and  his  scanty  revelations 
with  respect  to  the  plan  of  the  entire  work,  he  shows  a  maturity  of  knowl 
edge  which  is  astonishing  for  so  early  an  age. 

XXXI.  To  all  appearance,  tiie  poet,  after  certain  obstacles  have  been 
first  overcome,  tends  only  to  one  point,  namely,  to  increase  perpetually 
the  disasters  of  the  Greeks,  which  they  have  drawn  on  themselves  by  the 
injury  offered  to  Achilles  ;  and  Jupiter  himself,  at  the  beginning,  is  made 
to  pronounce,  as  coming  from  himself,  the  vengeance  and  consequent  ex 
altation  of  the  son  of  Thetis.    At  the  same  time,  however,  the  poet  plain 
ly  shows  his  wish  to  excite,  in  the  feelings  of  an  attentive  hearer,  an 
anxious  and  perpetually  increasing  desire  not  only  to  see  the  Greeks 
saved  from  destruction,  but  also  that  the  unbearable  and  more  than  human 
haughtiness  and  pride  of  Achilles  should  be  broken.    Both  these  ends  are 
attained  through  the  fulfillment  of  the  secret  counsel  of  Jove,  which  he  did 
not  communicate  to  Thetis,  and  through  her  to  Achilles  (who,  if  he  had 
known  it,  would  have  given  up  all  enmity  against  the  Achaeans),  but  only 
to  Juno,  and  to  her  not  till  the  middle  of  the  poem  j1  and  Achilles,  through 
the  loss  of  his  dearest  friend,  whom  he  had  sent  to  battle  not  to  save  the 
Greeks,  but  for  his  own  glory,  suddenly  changes  his  hostile  attitude  toward 
the  Greeks,  and  is  overpowered  by  entirely  opposite  feelings.     In  this 
manner  the  exaltation  of  the  son  of  Thetis  is  united  to  that  almost  imper 
ceptible  operation  of  destiny  which  the  Greeks  were  required  to  observe 
in  all  human  affairs. 

XXXII.  To  remove  from  this  collection  of  various  actions,  conditions, 
and  feelings  any  substantial  part,  as  not  necessarily  belonging  to  it,  would, 
in  fact,  be  to  dismember  a  living  whole,  the  parts  of  which  would  neces 
sarily  lose  their  vitality.    As  in  an  organic  body  life  does  not  dwell  in  one 
single  point,  but  requires  a  union  of  certain  systems  and  members,  so  the 
internal  connection  of  the  Iliad  rests  on  the  union  of  certain  parts  ;  and 
neither  the  interesting  introduction,  describing  the  defeat  of  the  Greeks, 
up  to  the  burning  of  the  ship  of  Protesilaus,  nor  the  turn  of  affairs  brought 
about  by  the  death  of  Patroclus,  nor  the  final  pacification  of  the  anger  of 
Achilles,  could  be  spared  from  the  Iliad,  when  the  fruitful  seed  of  such  a 
poem  had  once  been  sown  in  the  soul  of  Homer,  and  had  begun  to  de 
velop  its  growth. 

UNITY    OF    THE    ODYSSEY.2 

XXXIII.  If  we  yield  our  assent  to  these  convincing  reflections,  we 
shall  hardly  need  to  defend  the  unity  of  the  Odyssey,  which  has  always 
been  admired  as  one  of  the  greatest  master-pieces  of  Grecian  genius, 
against  the  aggressions  of  Wolf,  who  could  more  easily  believe  that 
chance  and  learned  compilers  had  produced  this  poem,  than  that  it  should 
have  sprung  from  the  mind  of  a  single  man. 

1  Thetis  had  said  nothing  to  Achilles  of  the  loss  of  Patroclus  (//.,  xvii.,  411),  for  she 
herself  did  not  know  it.  Jove  also  long  conceals  his  plans  from  Juno  and  the  other  gods, 
notwithstanding  their  anger  on  account  of  the  sufferings  of  the  Achseans.  He  does  not  re 
veal  them  to  Juno  until  after  his  sleep  upon  Ida  (II.,  xv.,  65).  The  spuriousness  of  tl« 
verses  (II.,  viii.,  475,  so/.)  was  recognized  by  the  ancient?,  although  the  principal  objeo 
tion  to  them  is  not  mentioned.  "  Jhn.(.  p.  504. 


POETICAL    PERIOD. 


39 


XXXIV.  Nitzsch1  has  endeavored  to  exhibit  the  unity  of  the  plan  ol 
this  poem.  He  has  divided  the  whole  into  four  large  sections,  in  each 
of  which  there  are  again  subdivisions  facilitating  the  distribution  of  the 
recital  for  several  rhapsodists  and  several  days.  Thus,  1.  The  first  part 
treats  of  the  absent  Ulysses  (books  i.-iv.).  Here  we  are  introduced  to  the 
state  of  affairs  in  Ithaca  during  the  absence  of  Ulysses.  Telemachus 
goes  to  Pylos  and  Sparta  to  ascertain  the  fate  of  his  father.  2.  The  song 
of  the  returning  Ulysses  (books  v.-xiii.,  v.  92)  is  naturally  divided  into  two 
parts  ;  the  first  contains  the  departure  of  Ulysses  from  Calypso,  and  his 
arrival  and  reception  in  Scheria ;  the  second,  the  narration  of  his  wan 
derings.  3.  The  song  of  Ulysses  meditating  revenge  (books  xiii.,  92-xix.). 
Here  the  two  threads  of  the  story  are  united ;  Ulysses  is  conveyed  to 
Ithaca,  and  is  met  in  the  cottage  of  Eumaeus  by  his  son,  who  has  just 
returned  from  Sparta.  4.  The  song  of  the  revenging  and  reconciled  Ulysses 
(books  xx.-xxiv.)  brings  all  the  manifold  wrongs  of  the  suitors  and  the 
sufferings  of  Ulysses  to  the  desired  and  long-expected  conclusion. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD  —  continued. 
HOMERIC    CONTROVERS Y — continued. 

PROOF    FROM    INTERNAL    EVIDENCE    THAT    THE   HOMERIC   POEMS    ARE 
THE    WORK    OF    ONE    AUTHOR.2 

I.  In  order  to  prove  from  internal  evidence  that  the  Homeric  poems 
are  the  works  of  one  author,  it  is  necessary  to  establish  three  points.     I. 
General  similarity  of  style,  taste,  and  feeling.     II.  Unity  of  plan.     III. 
Consistency  in  the  characters.     The  second  of  these  points  has  already 
been  anticipated  in  the  previous  chapter.     The  remaining  two  will  now 
occupy  our  attention. 

I.    GENERAL    SIMILARITY    OF    STYLE,    TASTE,    AND    FEELING. 

II.  The  language  of  the  Iliad  is  throughout  evidently  that  of  one  pe 
riod  ;  it  does  not  exhibit  so  much  variation  as  might  be  supposed  to  take 
place  during  the  course  of  two  successive  generations ;  but,  more  than 
this,  the  propriety  of  expression,  the  adaptation  of  the  descriptions  to  the 
things  described,  bear  such  marks  of  undesigned  and  natural  resemblance, 
that  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  imagine  them  to  have  proceeded  from  more 
than  one  mind.     Such,  it  must  be  confessed,  is  the  general  impression 
produced  upon  the  reader,  unless  biased  and  inclined  toward  the  con 
trary  belief  by  other  arguments  and  considerations. 

III.  The  same  words,  the  same  phrases,  the  same  modes  of  illustra 
tion,  are  constantly  recurring.     Some  favorite  similes,  for  instance,  such 
as  those  of  the  lion  and  the  boar,  are  frequently  used.     Their  details  are 

1  Hall.  Encyclop.,  s.  v.  Odyssee ;  Anmerk.  z.  Odyss.,  vol. 
a  Browne,  Hist.  Class.  Lit.,  vol.  i.,  p.  52,  seqq. 


40  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

sufficiently  similar  to  show  probable  identity  of  authorship,  without  wea 
rying  by  too  much  repetition. 

IV.  The  same  musical  rhythm  and  metrical  arrangement  are  preserved 
throughout.     The  Homeric  verse  is  sui  generis,  it  can  be  compared  to 
that  of  no  other  poet  in  any  age.     And  this  phenomenon,  be  it  remem 
bered,  occurred  when  the  laws  of  metre  must  have  been  simply  the  sug 
gestions  of  a  delicately  organized  ear  and  a  naturally  refined  taste.    They 
could  not  have  been  reduced  to  rule  in  so  remote  an  age,  and  therefore 
there  were  no  means  of  attaining  resemblance  to  one  great  and  perfect 
model  by  study  and  imitation. 

V.  There  is  a  characteristic  of  the  Homeric  poetry  which,  in  the  man 
ner  of  its  treatment,  is  without  parallel,  although  it  has  been  imitated  by 
countless  poets  since  his  time :  this  is  the  Simile.1     It  is  evidently  the 
favorite  figure  of  the  bard,  full  of  knowledge  gathered  from  observation 
of  nature,  animate  and  inanimate.     Apposite,  however,  as  the  Homeric 
similes  are,  it  is  not  that  quality  which  strikes  the  reader  as  constituting 
their  especial  beauty ;  we  almost  lose  sight  of  its  intention  to  illustrate, 
in  the  profusion  and  variety  of  the  images  presented  to  us.     This  is  not 
the  case  with  the  similes  of  any  other  author,  except  where  they  are  pal 
pable  imitations  of  those  of  Homer.     As  no  poet  ever  possessed  the  same 
graphic  power,  so  none  could  venture,  without  danger  of  producing  wea 
riness,  to  introduce  this  figure  so  frequently.     Every  part  of  the  Iliad 
abounds  with  them,  except  the  commencement  and  conclusion  of  the 
poem  ;  and  this  fact  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  busy  character  of  these 
portions  ;  the  rapid  succession  of  events  left  no  room  for  illustration. 

VI.  Again,  dramatic  power  pervades  the  whole  poem.2     Every  charac 
ter  describes  himself,  and  tells  his  own  story.     The  poet  is  never  seen, 
his  sentiments  are  never  known  but  through  the  medium  of  his  actors  : 
he  is  never  subjective,  he  seems  to  forget  himself.     Although  he  is  de 
scribing  his  own  feelings,  and  enforcing  his  own  seritiments,  he  never 
personally  appears  upon  the  stage,  but  leaves  it  to  his  characters  to  ex 
press  his  thoughts  ;  and  this  is  not  only  the  case  sometimes,  but  univers 
ally.     Is  it  probable,  then,  that  more  than  one  poet,  in  one  age,  should 
have  possessed  this  dramatic  faculty  in  so  eminent  a  degree  1 

VII.  Uniformity  on  other  points  of  this  nature  seems  to  stamp  the  poem 
as  the  work  of  one  mind.     Stories  the  most  different  from  one  another 
are  told  precisely  in  the  same  way ;  conversations  and  councils  are  car 
ried  on  after  the  same  plan.     The  sentiments  on  all  important  subjects, 
whether  religious,  political,  or  social,  are  uniform  and  without  variation. 
One  high  tone  of  moral  principle  and  willing  obedience  to  law,  both  human 
and  divine,  pervades  the  whole  work. 

VIII.  It  is,  doubtless,  possible  to  conceive  that  a  school  of  poets,  such 
as  the  bards  of  the  Homeric  Age  must  have  been,  venerated  for  their  in 
spiration,  and  respected  for  their  moral  and  religious  worth,  would  have 
resembled  each  other  in  mental  culture,  taste,  and  sentiments ;  but  they 
could  not  have  been  equal  in  that  mental  power,  which  would  have  been 
necessary  to  produce  the  uniformity  in  these  points  observable  in  the  Ho- 

1  Compare  Mure,  <^rit.  Hist.,vo\.  ii .,  p.  89,  srqq.  2  /^  ^%  p  57^  gfqq. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  41 

meric  poems.  Throughout  the  Iliad  no  more  inequality  of  talent  is  to  be 
discerned  than  in  great  works  which  are  known  to  have  had  but  one  au 
thor  ;  at  any  rate,  no  more  than  would  result  from  interpolations  and  ad 
ditions,  the  introduction  of  which,  to  a  certain  extent,  it  is  impossible  to 
deny. 

IX.  The  language  of  the  Odyssey  is  throughout  the  whole  poem  as  uni 
form  in  its  structure  and  its  principles  as  the  Iliad.     The  versification 
never  varies,  it  has  always  the  same  mechanical  structure  and  the  same 
harmonious  flow,  which  is  so  difficult  to  arrive  at,  without  betraying  a 
palpable  attempt  at  imitation.     There  can  be  traced  also,  from  beginning 
to  end,  a  consistent  moral  and  religious  principle,  dramatic  power,  fidel 
ity  in  describing,  and  taste  in  appreciating  the  beauties  of  nature ;  and 
lastly,  spirit  and  picturesqueness  in  the  use  of  similes  and  illustrations. 
These  considerations  are  in  favor  of  the  hypothesis  that  the  Odyssey,  like 
the  Iliad,  had  but  one  author,  and  was  not  formed  by  collecting  together 
lays  and  episodes  by  different  poets. 

II.     CONSISTENCY     IN     THE     CHARACTERS.1 

X.  In  his  heroes  the  poet  evidently  intended  to  typify  some  striking 
phase  of  the  heroic  character.     They  all  have  their  points  of  resemblance, 
but  the  points  of  contrast  are  more  fully  dwelt  upon.     Each  is  a  repre 
sentative  man.     Standing  out,  therefore,  thus  in  bold  relief,  the  slightest 
inconsistency  would  be  at  once  detected.     So  strong,  in  fact,  was  the 
poet's  impression  of  the  distinct  individuality  of  his  heroes,  that  frequent 
ly  the  same  distinctive  epithet  is  applied  to  each,  on  the  majority  of  oc 
casions,  throughout  his  whole  career.     Opposite  as  are  the  traits  which 
mark  the  character  of  Achilles,  they  are  all,  vices  as  well  as  virtues,  such 
as  may  be  found  united  in  noble  and  impetuous  natures.     Revengeful  as 
he  is,  even  to  ferocity,  his  warm  and  passionate  heart  can  sympathize 
with  deep  sorrow,  and  feel  compassion  for  the  vanquished.     He  is  haugh 
ty  and  reserved,  and  yet  a  devoted  and  affectionate  friend ;  unrelenting 
under  a  sense  of  injustice,  yet,  when  satisfaction  is  offered,  he  is  gener 
ously  and  unconditionally  forgiving. 

XI.  Agamemnon2  has  all  the  regard  for  his  subjects  which  marks  the 
sovereign  of  a  free  people,  but  his  generosity  proceeds  from  impulse  rather 
than  principle,  and  therefore  he  is  generally  dignified,  but  sometimes  vac 
illating.     Menelaus,3  though  not  kingly,  possesses  the  virtues  of  royal 
race.     He  is  brave  and  gentle,  and  has  an  unfeigned  respect  for  the  regal 
authority.     Nestor*  is  an  old  man,  and  an  experienced  statesman  ;  he  has 
all  the  garrulity  of  the  one,  and  the  long-sighted  wisdom  of  the  other.    He 
is  too  cheerful  to  betray  much  of  the  querulousness  of  age,  although  he 
can  not  forbear  comparing  the  virtue  of  former  days  with  the  degeneracy 
of  the  present  generation. 

XII.  Ajax5  and  Diomede6  are  thoroughly  soldiers.     The  former  has  all 

1  Browne,  Hist.  Class.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  78,  seqq.     Compare  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p. 
304,  seqq.  2  Compare  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  314,  seqq. 

3  Id.  ib.,  p.  324,  seqq.  *  Id.  ib.,  p.  329,  seqq. 

6  Id.  ib.,  p.  334,  seqq.  6  Id.  ib.,  p.  320,  seqq. 


42  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

the  physical  strength  and  animal  courage  which  fit  a  man  for  the  perils 
of  war ;  the  latter,  the  moral  firmness  and  well-disciplined  coolness  which 
render  him  fit  either  to  command  or  obey.  Ulysses  possesses  every  quali 
fication,  bodily  as  well  as  mental,  for  influencing  men's  minds ;  he  is  of 
noble  figure  and  graceful  bearing,  sound-judging  and  discreet ;  an  accu 
rate  observer  of  men  and  things.  His  intimate  knowledge  of  the  human 
heart,  and  its  crooked  ways,  causes  the  policy,  which  is  his  favorite  weap 
on,  to  appear  at  times  crafty  and  dishonest,  but  it  is  only  appearance,  for 
he  is  benevolent,  and  has  a  strong  sense  of  justice. 

XIII.  Hector  unites  moral  with  physical  courage,  but  his  warlike  spirit 
sometimes  degenerates  into  rashness.     He  is  domestic  and  affectionate, 
and  shows  that  tenderness  toward  women  and  children  which  character 
izes  true  bravery.     Priam  is  an  Oriental  sovereign,  whose  yielding  yet 
amiable  temper  allows  things  to  take  their  own  course.     He  is  too  care 
less  and  self-indulgent  to  have  any  high  moral  principle,  and  yet  he  has 
strong  affections,  and  impulses  toward  good.     At  length  the  depth  of  his 
despair  awakens  his  energy,  and  in  his  old  age,  for  the  first  time,  he  acts 
with  vigor  and  heroism.     Paris  is  an  effeminate  and  conceited  fop,  but 
brave  notwithstanding,  as  those  often  are  who  have  been  brought  up  in 
refinement  and  luxury. 

XIV.  Helen,  though  a  light  wanton,  who  has  left  her  husband  and  child 
for  an  adulterer,  is  full  of  fascination.     She  is  neither  bold  nor  depraved ; 
she  can  admire  chastity,  she  feels  remorse  for  her  sin ;  to  her  seducer 
she  is  tender  and  faithful ;  but  even  when  restored  to  her  husband,  there 
remains  that  voluptuous  self-indulgence  which  perhaps  paved  the  way  to 
her  weakness  and  her  fall. 

XV.  Hecuba  is  a  woman  of  strong  passions,  whose  ferocity  is  in 
creased,  and  not  softened,  by  affliction ;  she  can  never  look  on  Helen  in 
any  other  light  than  as  the  cause  of  all  her  sorrows,  and  of  course  her 
revengeful  temper  can  never  forgive  her.     Andromache,  the  affectionate 
wife  and  mother,  has  not  a  spark  of  selfishness  in  her  character.     In  his 
lifetime  she  was  wrapped  up  in  her  husband,  and  after  his  death,  though 
overwhelmed  with  the  weight  of  her  sorrows,  she  thinks  more  of  her 
husband's  fame,  her  child's  irreparable  loss,  and  the  ruin  of  her  country. 

XVI.  Such  are  the  principal  characters  of  the  Iliad.     Those  who  play 
an  important  part  in  the  Odyssey1  are  very  few.     Helen  and  Ulysses 
have  already  been  described,  and  in  the  luxurious  matron,  restored  to  her 
place  in  society,  and  the  patient,  strong-willed  voyager,  struggling  with 
adverse  fortune,  the  same  points  of  character  which  were  depicted  in 
the  Iliad  are  plainly  discoverable,  modified,  as  they  necessarily  must  be, 
by  change  of  circumstances. 

XVII.  Telemachus  is  a  modest,  ingenuous,  and  promising  youth,  full 
of  consideration  for  his  mother,  and  although  not  yet  able  to  act  for  him 
self,  willing  to  act  with  decision  and  energy  at  the  suggestion  of  a  wise 
counsellor,  and  with  a  strong  sense  of  filial  duty  and  obedience  to  his  fa 
ther's  will. 

XVIII.  Penelope  appears  to  possess  the  cool  diplomatic  policy  which 

1  Compare  Mure,  Crit,  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  413,  scqq. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  43 

distinguishes  her  husband,  alloyed  with  somewhat  of  duplicity.  Exposed 
as  she  is  to  the  solicitations  of  the  suitors,  she  has  doubtless  a  difficult 
part  to  play ;  but  the  false  hopes  with  which  she  deceives  them,  and  the 
stratagem  with  which  she  puts  off  the  fulfillment  of  her  promise,  wttile 
she  permits  their  riot  and  extravagance,  are  scarcely  consistent  with  a 
high  tone  of  morality.  She  remains,  however,  faithful  to  her  husband, 
even  when  his  return  scarcely  seems  probable ;  and  when  her  fidelity  is 
rewarded  by  his  return,  her  coldness  gradually  melts,  her  caution  gives 
way  to  conviction,  and  at  length  all  her  calculating  shrewdness  vanishes. 
The  mask  and  restraint  under  which  she  had  so  long  lived  are  removed, 
and  her  true  woman's  nature  shines  forth  at  once  in  all  its  tenderness 
and  affection.  Such  a  change,  at  first  sight,  may  appear  inconsistent, 
but  the  skillful  and  gradual  manner  in  which  it  is  managed  by  the  poet 
renders  it  perfectly  natural. 

XIX.  Euryclea  is  a  model  nurse  ;  she  continues  the  same  attention  to 
Telemaclms  when  he  is  a  youth  which  she  paid  him  in  infancy ;  nor  is 
her  kindness  unreturned  by  her  foster-child,  for  she  it  is  to  whom  he  ap 
plies  in  his  difficulty,  when  a  ship  is  refused  him  by  the  suitors. 

XX.  The  elegant  and  unaffected  simplicity  of  Nausicaa  is  most  charm 
ing  ;  and  the  noble  swineherd  Eumaeus,  the  keeper  of  the  king's  swine, 
the  principal  wealth  of  his  rocky  isle,  presents  an  inimitable  picture  of 
that  sturdy,  yeoman-like  independence  which  is  fostered  and  nurtured  by 
the  pursuits  of  rural  life. 

XXI.  Such  is  the  internal  evidence  in  favor  of  both  the  great  Homeric 
poems  having  been  the  works  of  one  mind,  and  to  this  evidence  may  be 
added  the  following  considerations.     It  is  not  too  much  to  assert  that 
the  conditions  requisite  for  denying  the  personality  of  Homer  have  never 
been  fulfilled  in  any  nation  or  in  any  times.     The  separators1  of  the  Iliad 
from  the  Odyssey  require  the  belief  that,  during  a  period  extending  over 
no  very  wide  space,  there  should  have  lived  two  poets,  whose  talents 
and  genius  were  of  so  high  an  order,  and  so  nearly  equal,  as  to  have  pro 
duced  these  two  great  poems.     And  yet  the  history  of  the  world  proves 
that  no  nation,  during  the  whole  period  of  its  existence,  has  ever  pos 
sessed  more  than  one  great  epic  poet.     Rome  had  one  Virgil,  modern 
Italy  one  Dante,  England  one  Milton.2 

XXII.  If  the  separators  demand  that  which  is  improbable,  those,  on  the 
other  hand,  who  attribute  the  poems  to  a  large  number  of  original  bards, 
argue  in  favor  of  a  moral  impossibility.     To  adopt  their  view  implies 
the  belief  that  at  a  period  when  all  the  rest  of  the  world  was  destitute 
of  literature,  except  the  Semitic  nations  inhabiting  Palestine,  Greece  and 
her  colonies  were  so  fruitful  in  poets  as  to  give  birth,  almost  simultane 
ously,  to  a  vast  number ;  that  this  phenomenon  never  occurred  in  that 
country  either  before  or  since  ;  that  they  all  chose  for  their  theme  differ 
ent  parts  of  the  same  subject ;  and  that  these,  by  accident  or  design, 
were  so  portioned  out  among  them  as  to  be  capable  of  being  welded  to 
gether  into  one  harmonious  whole.     This  whole,  moreover,  was  so  com 
plete  as  to  contain  all  that  so  acute  a  critic  as  Aristotle,  and  many  schol- 

1   Vid.  p.  53.  3  Browne,  Hist.  Class.  Lit.,\ol.  i.,  p.  83. 


44  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ars  of  the  most  accomplished  taste  since  his  time,  deemed  essential  to 
an  epic  poem.  And  again,  those  who  arranged  and  set  in  order  these 
separate  poems,  whether  rhapsodists  or  others,  must  have  possessed 
such  exquisite  skill  and  judgment  that  the  places  where  they  are  joined 
together  never  present  the  appearance  of  abrupt  transition  from  one  part 
to  another.  And  as  this  union  could  not  have  been  effected  without  the 
composition  of  some  fresh  passages,  they  must  have  been  poets  and  im 
itators  nearly  equal  to  the  original  composers  themselves  I1 


CHAPTER  VII. 

SECOND   OR  POETICAL  PERIOD  —  continued. 
HOMERIC  CONTROVERS Y — continued. 

HOMERIC   INTERPOLATIONS.2 

I.  ALTHOUGH  we  maintain  the  unity  of  both  the  Homeric  poems,  we  can 
not  deny  that  they  have  suffered  greatly  from  interpolations,  omissions, 
and  alterations  ;  and  it  is  only  by  admitting  some  original  poetical  whole 
that  we  are  able  to  discover  those  parts  which  do  not  belong  to  this  whole. 

II.  Wolf,  therefore,  in  pointing  out  some  parts  as  spurious,  has  been 
led  into  an  inconsistency  in  his  demonstration,  since  he  is  obliged  to  ac 
knowledge  something  as  the  genuine  centre  of  the  two  poems,  which  he 
must  suppose  to  have  been  spun  out  more  and  more  by  subsequent  rhap 
sodists.     This  altered  view,  which  is  distinctly  pronounced  in  the  preface 
to  his  edition  of  Homer,  appears  already  in  the  Prolegomena,  and  has 
been  subsequently  embraced  by  Hermann  and  other  critics.     It  is,  as  we 
have  said,  a  necessary  consequence  from  the  discovery  of  interpolations. 

III.  These  interpolations  are  particularly  apparent  in  the  first  part  of 
the  Iliad.    The  catalogue  of  the  ships  has  long  been  recognized  as  a  later 
addition,  and  can  be  omitted  without  leaving  the  slightest  gap.    The  bat 
tles  from  the  third  to  the  seventh  book  seem  almost  entirely  foreign  to 
the  plan  of  the  Iliad.     Jove  appears  to  have  quite  forgotten  his  promise 
to  Thetis,  that  he  would  honor  her  son  by  letting  Agamemnon  feel  his 
absence.     The  Greeks  are  far  from  feeling  this.     Diomede  fights  suc 
cessfully  even  against  gods ;  the  Trojans  are  driven  back  to  the  town. 
In  an  assembly  of  the  gods,  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  book,  the  glory 
of  Achilles  is  no  motive  to  deliver  Troy  from  her  fate ;  it  is  not  till  the 
eighth  book  that  Jupiter  all  at  once  seems  mindful  of  his  promise  to 
Thetis. 

IV.  The  preceding  five  books  are  not  only  loosely  connected  with  the 
whole  of  the  poem,  but  even  with  one  another.    The  single  combat  between 
Menelaus  and  Paris,  in  the  third  book,  in  which  the  former  was  on  the 
point  of  dispatching  the  seducer  of  his  wife,  is  interrupted  by  the  treach 
erous  shot  of  Pandarus.     In  the  next  book  all  this  is  forgotten.     The 
Greeks  neither  claim  Helen  as  the  prize  of  the  victory  of  Menelaus,  nor 
do  they  complain  of  the  breach  of  the  oath :  no  god  avenges  the  perjury. 

!  Browne,  p.  84.  *  Ihne  (Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  Homerus),  p.  505. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  45 

Paris,  in  the  sixth  book,  sits  quietly  at  home,  where  Hector  severely  up 
braids  him  for  his  cowardice  and  retirement  from  war  ;  to  which  Paris 
makes  no  reply,  and  does  not  plead  that  he  had  only  just  encountered 
Menelaus  in  deadly  fight. 

V.  The  tenth  book,  containing  the  nocturnal  expedition  of  Ulysses  and 
Diomede,  in  which  they  kill  the  Thracian  king  Rhesus,  and  take  his 
horses,  is  avowedly  of  later  origin.1     No  reference  is  subsequently  made 
by  any  of  the  Greeks  or  Trojans  to  this  gallant  deed.     The  two  heroes 
were  sent  as  spies,  but  they  never  narrate  the  result  of  their  expedition  ; 
not  to  speak  of  many  other  improbabilities.    To  enumerate  all  those  pas 
sages  which  are  reasonably  suspected  as  interpolated  would  lead  us  too  far. 

VI.  The  Odyssey  has  experienced  similar  extensions  and  interpola 
tions,  which,  far  from  inducing  us  to  believe  in  an  atomistical  origin  of 
the  poem,  only  show  that  the  original  plan  has  been  here  and  there  ob 
scured.     Nitzsch2  has  tried  to  remove  these  difficulties,  but  he  does  not 
deny  extensive  interpolations,  particularly  in  the  eighth  book,  where  the 
song  of  Demodocus  concerning  Mars  and  Venus  is  very  suspicious.     In 
the  nineteenth  book,  the  recognition  of  Ulysses  by  his  old  nurse,  and, 
most  of  all,  some  parts  near  the  end,  appear  to  be  also  interpolated.    All 
that  follows  after  verse  296,  book  twenty-three,  was  declared  spurious 
even  by  the  Alexandrine  critics,  Aristophanes  and  Aristarchus.3    The 
second  Necyia  (in  the  beginning  of  book  twenty-four)  is  evidently  spuri 
ous,  and,  like  many  parts  of  the  first  Necyia,  in  book  eleven,  most  likely 
taken  from  a  similar  passage  in  the  No<rro/,  in  which  was  narrated  the 
arrival  of  Agamemnon  in  Hades.* 

VII.  Considering  all  these  interpolations  and  the  original  unity,  which 
has  only  been  obscured  and  not  destroyed  by  them,  we  must  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  Homeric  poems  were  originally  composed  as  poetic 
wholes,  but  that  a  long  oral  tradition  gave  occasion  to  great  alterations  in 
their  original  form. 

RHAPSODISTS.5 

VIII.  Wolf,  from  the  premises  laid«down  by  him,  and  which  we  have 
already  examined,  came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Homeric  poems  orig 
inated  as  small  songs,  unconnected  with  one  another,  which,  after  being 
preserved  in  this  state  for  a  long  time,  were  at  length  put  together.    The 
agents  to  whom  he  attributed  these  two  tasks  of  composing  and  preserv 
ing  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  collecting  and  combining  on  the  other,  are  the 
rhapsodists  and  Pisistratus.     Originally,  the  bard  sang,  enlivening  the 
song  with  occasional  touches  of  the  harp.    His  successor,  the  rhapsodist, 
merely  recited  the  words,  depending  for  effect  upon  voice  and  manner  ; 
a  species  of  musical  and  rhythmical  declamation,  which  gradually  in 
creased  in  vehement  emphasis  and  gesticulation  until  it  approached  to 
that  of  the  dramatic  actor. 

IX.  The  subject  of  the  rhapsodists  (/ScuJ/ySoi)  is  one  of  the  most  compli- 


i  Schol.  Yen.  ad  IL,  x.,  1.  2  Anmerk.  z.  Odyss.,  vol.  ii.,  prsef.,  p.  xliii. 

3  Spohn,  Comment,  deextrem.  Odysseos  part  e,  1816. 
*  Pausan.,  x.:  23,  4.  5  Vine,  p.  506. 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 

cated  and  difficult  of  all ;  because  the  fact  is,  that  we  know  very  little 
about  them,  and  thus  a  large  field  is  opened  to  conjecture  and  hypothesis.1 
Wolf  derives  the  name  of  rhapsodist  (fagots)  from  pd-rrreiv  $$&,  which 
he  interprets  "  breviora  carmina  modo  et  or  dine  publica  recitationi  apto  connec- 
tere."  These  breviora  carmina  are  the  rhapsodies  of  which  the  Iliad  and 
Odyssey  consist,  not  indeed  containing  originally  one  book  each,  as  they 
do  now,  but  sometimes  more  and  sometimes  less.  The  nature  and  con 
dition  of  these  rhapsodists  may  be  learned,  according  to  Woll,  from  Homer 
himself,  where  they  appear  as  singing  at  the  banquets,  games,  and  fes 
tivals  of  the  princes,  and  are  held  in  high  honor.2  In  fact,  the  first  rhap 
sodists  were  the  poets  themselves,  just  as  the  first  dramatic  poets  were 
the  first  actors.  Therefore  Homer  and  Hesiod  are  said  to  have  rhap 
sodized.3 

X.  We  must  imagine,  continues  Wolf,  that  these  minstrels  were  spread 
over  all  Greece,  and  that  they  did  not  confine  themselves  to  the  recital 
of  the  Homeric  poems.    One  class  of  rhapsodists  at  Chios,  the  Homeridae,4 
who  called  themselves,  without  any  good  ground  however,  descendants  of 
the  poet,  possessed  these  particular  poems,  and  transmitted  them  to  their 
disciples  by  oral  teaching,  and  not  by  writing.    This  kind  of  oral  teaching 
was  most  carefully  cultivated  in  Greece,  even  when  the  use  of  writing 
was  quite  common.     The  tragic  and  comic  poets  employed  no  other  way 
of  training  the  actors  than  this  oral  StSacr/caAia,  with  which  the  greatest 
accuracy  was  combined.     Therefore,  says  Wolf,  it  is  not  likely  that,  al 
though  not  committed  to  writing,  the  Homeric  poems  underwent  very 
great  changes  by  a  long  and  oral  tradition  ;  only  it  is  impossible  that  they 
should  have  remained  quite  unaltered.    Many  of  the  rhapsodists  were  not 
destitute  of  poetic  genius,  or  they  acquired  it  by  the  constant  recitation 
of  those  beautiful  lays.     Why,  he  asks,  should  they  not  have  sometimes 
adapted  their  recitation  to  the  immediate  occasion,  or  even  have  endeav 
ored  to  make  some  passages  better  than  they  were  1 

XI.  We  can  admit  almost  all  this  without  drawing  from  it  Wolf's  con 
clusion.    Does  not  such  a  condition  of  the  rhapsodists  agree  as  well  with 
the  task  which  we  assign  to  them,  of  preserving  and  reciting  a  poem 
which  already  existed  as  a  whole?  *  Even  the  etymology  of  the  name  of 
rhapsodist,  which  is  surprisingly  inconsistent  with  Wolf's  general  view, 
favors  that  of  his  adversaries.     Wolf's  fundamental  opinion  is,  that  the 
original  songs  were  unconnected,  and  singly  recited.    How,  then,  can  the 
rhapsodists  have  obtained  their  name  from  connecting  poems  1     On  the 
other  hand,  if  the  Homeric  poems  originally  existed  as  wholes,  and  the 
rhapsodists  connected  the  single  parts  of  these  wholes  for  public  recitation, 
they  might,  perhaps,  be  called  "connecters  of  songs."     But  this  etymol 
ogy  has  not  appeared  satisfactoiy  to  some,  who  have  thought  that  this 
process  would  rather  be  a  keeping  together  than  a  putting  together.    They 
have  therefore  supposed  that  the  word  was  derived  from  &d&8os,  the  staff 


i  Wolf,  Proleg.,  p.  96;  Nitzsch,  Prol.  ad  Plat.  Ion.;  Heyne,  2  Excurs.  ad  II.,  xxiv.  ; 
BtJckh  ad  Find.  Nem.,  ii.,  1  ;  Isthm.,  Hi.,  55  ;  Nitzsch,  Indaganda,  &c.,  Histor.  Crit.  ; 
Kreuser,  d.  Horn.  Rhapsod.  2  Qd.,  iii.,  267  ;  xviii.,  383. 

3  Plat.,  DeRep.,  x.,  p.  600  ;  Srhol.  ail  Pind.  Nem.,  ii.,  1.      4  Harpocrat.,  s.  v.  ' 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  47 

or  ensign  of  the  bards  ;*  an  etymology  which  seems  countenanced  by  Pin 
dar's  expression  pdfrSov  beffTteaiwv  eTreW.2  But  Pindar  in  another  passage 
gives  the  other  etymology  ;3  and,  besides,  it  does  not  appear  how  fatyuSos 
could  be  formed  from  pa/3Sos,  which  would  make  £aj35>5(k.  Others,  there 
fore,  have  thought  of  pcnrts,  "  a  stick,"  and  have  formed  fairurcpMsj  patyy- 
56s.  But  even  this  will  not  do  ;  for,  leaving  out  of  view  that  pans  does 
not  occur  in  the  signification  of  pdfiSos,  the  word  would  be  painSuSos. 
Nothing  is  left,  therefore,  but  the  etymology  from  pdirrew  (?8ds,  which  is 
only  to  be  interpreted  in  the  proper  way. 

XII.  Mxiller  says4  that  pa-tyufew  signifies  nothing  more  than  the  pecul 
iar  method  of  epic  recitation,  consisting  in  some  high-pitched,  sonorous 
declamations,  with  certain  simple  modulations  of  the  voice,  not  in  sing 
ing  regularly  accompanied  by  an  instrument,  which  was  the  method  of 
reciting  lyric  poetry.     Every  poem,  he  remarks,  can  be  rhapsodized, 
which  is  composed  in  an  epic  tone,  and  in  which  the  verses  are  of  equal 
length,  without  being  distributed  into  corresponding  parts  of  a  larger  whole, 
strophes,  or  similar  systems.    Miiller,  therefore,  thinks  that  pdirreiv  tf^v 
denotes  the  coupling  together  of  verses,  without  any  considerable  divi 
sions  or  pauses ;  in  other  words,  the  even,  continuous,  and  unbroken  flow 
of  the  epic  poem. 

XIII.  But  it  has  been  justly  objected  to  this  explanation  of  Miiller's 
that  ^877  does  not  mean  a  verse ;  and  besides,  that  a  reference  to  the  man 
ner  of  epic  recitation,  as  different  from  that  of  lyric  poetry,  could  only  be 
imparted  to  the  word  paxJ/wSos  at  a  time  when  lyric  composition  and  reci 
tation  originated,  that  is,  not  before  Archilochus.     Previous  to  that  time, 
the  meaning  of  rhapsodist  must  have  been  different.     It  has  been  sug 
gested,  therefore,  that  pairrsiv  ffids  may  have  been  used  in  the  significa 
tion  of  planning  and  making  lays,  just  as  pdirTetv  KO.KO.  is  to  plan  or  make 
mischief. 

XIV.  But  whatever  may  be  the  right  derivation  of  the  word,  and  what 
ever  may  have  been  the  nature  and  condition  of  the  rhapsodists,  so  much  is 
evident,  that  no  support  can  be  derived  from  this  point  for  Wolf's  position. 

THE    COLLECTION    OF   THE   HOMERIC    POEMS   ASCRIBED   TO    PISISTRATUS.5 

XV.  Solon6  made  the  first  step  toward  that  which  Pisistratus  accom 
plished.     He  is  described  as  having  checked  the  prevailing  irregularities 
of  recital,  and  having  compelled  the  rhapsodists  to  adhere  to  the  regular 
order  of  the  text.     Pisistratus  went  farther,  and  collected  the  poems, 
previously  in  a  state  of  disorder,  into  a  single  body  or  volume.7    Wolf 
explains  this  tradition  respecting  Pisistratus  in  a  manner  well  calculated 
to  favor  his  own  peculiar  views.     He  held  this  to  have  been  the  first 
move  that  was  made  in  order  to  connect  what,  according  to  him,  were 
before  this  loose  and  incoherent  songs,  into  continued  and  uninterrupted 

1  Hes.,  Theog.,  30.         »  Isthm.,  iii.,  5.         3  Nem.,  ii.,  1.        *  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  33. 

5  Ihne,  p.  506.     Compare  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  i.,  p.  203,  seqq. 

6  Diog.  Laert.,  i.,  57. 

7  Cic.,  De  Or.,  iii.,  34;  Pausan.,  vii.,  26;  Joseph,  c.  Ap.,  i.,  2;  JEHan.,  V.  H.,  xiii.,  14; 
Liban.,  Paneg.  in  Julian.,  i.,  p.  170,  ed.  Reiske,  &e. 


48  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

stories.  Pausanias  mentions  associates  (eVatpot)  of  Pisistratns,  who  as 
sisted  him  in  the  undertaking.  These  associates  Wolf  thought  were  the 
8iacrK€va<rTai  mentioned  sometimes  in  the  scholia  ;  but  in  this  he  was  ev 
idently  mistaken.  Aiccovcet/atrrai  are,  in  the  phraseology  of  the  scholia, 
interpolators,  and  not  arrangers.1 

XVI.  Another  weak  point  in  Wolf's  reasoning  is  his  saying  that  Pisis- 
tratus  was  the  first  who  committed  the  Homeric  poems  to  writing.    This 
is  expressly  stated  by  none  of  the  ancient  writers.     On  the  contrary,  it 
is  not  unlikely  that  before  Pisistratus,  persons  began  in  various  parts  of 
Greece,  and  particularly  in  Asia  Minor,  which  was  far  in  advance  of  the 
mother  country,  to  write  down  parts  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey.     Whom 
Pisistratus  employed  in  this  undertaking  Wolf  could  only  conjecture. 
The  poet  Onomacritus  lived  at  that  time  in  Athens,  and  was  engaged  in 
similar  pursuits  respecting  the  old  poet  Musaeus.     Besides  him,  Wolf 
thought  of  a  certain  Orpheus  of  Crotona  ;  but  nothing  definite  was  known 
on  this  point  till  Professor  Ritschl  discovered,  in  a  MS.  of  Plautus  at 
Rome,  an  old  Latin  scholion  translated  from  the  Greek  of  Tzetzes  (pub 
lished  in  Cramer's  Anecdota}.     This  scholion  gives  the  names  of  four  po 
ets  who  assisted  Pisistratus,  viz.,  Onomacritus,  Zopyrus,  Orpheus,  and 
a  fourth,  whose  name  is  corrupted,  Concylus.2 

XVII.  These  four  persons  may  have  interpolated  some  passages,  as  it 
suited  the  p"ride  of  the  Athenians  or  the  political  purposes  of  their  patron 
Pisistratus.     In  fact,  Onomacritus  is  particularly  charged  with  having 
interpolated  Od.,  xi.,  604.3     The  Athenians  were  generally  believed  to 
have  had  no  part  in  the  Trojan  war  ;  therefore  E.,  ii.,  547,  552-554,  were 
marked  by  the  Alexandrine  grammarians  as  spurious,  and  for  similar 
reasons  Od.,  vii.,  80,  81,  and  Od.,  iii.,  308.     But  how  unimportant  are 
these  alterations  in  comparison  with  the  long  interpolations  which  must 
be  attributed  to  the  rhapsodists  previous  to  Pisistratus  ! 

XVIII.  It  must  be  confessed  that  these  four  men  accomplished  their 
task,  on  the  whole,  with  great  accuracy.     However  inclined  we  may  be 
to  attribute  this  accuracy  less  to  their  critical  investigations  and  consci 
entiousness  than  to  the  impossibility  of  making  great  changes  on  account 
of  the  general  knowledge  of  what  was  genuine,  through  the  number  of 
existing  copies ;  and  although  we  may,  on  the  whole,  be  induced,  after 
Wolf's  exaggerations,  to  think  little  of  Pisistratus,  still  we  must  admit 
that  the  praise  bestowed  on  him  by  the  ancient  writers  is  too  great  and 
too  general  to  allow  us  to  assent  to  Nitzsch's  opinion  that  he  only  com 
pared  and  examined  various  MSS. 

XIX.  If,  then,  it  does  not  follow,  as  Wolf  thought,  that  the  Homeric 
poems  never  formed  a  whole  before  Pisistratus,  it  is  at  the  same  time 
undeniable  that  to  Pisistratus  we  owe  the  first  written  text  of  the  whole 
of  the  poems,  which,  without  his  care,  would  most  likely  now  exist  only 
in  a  few  disjointed  fragments. 

1  Heinrich.,  De  Diask.  Homericis ;  Lehrs,  Aristarchi  Stud.  Horn.,  p.  349. 

2  Ritschl,  Die  Alex.  Bibl.  u.  d.  Sammlung  d.  Horn,  Gedichte  durch  Peisistr.,  1838 ;  Id., 
Corollar.  Disput.  de  Bibl.  Alex,  deque  Pisistr.  Curis  Horn.,  1840. 

3  Srfrol.  Hariri.,  ert.  Porson. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  49 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 

HOMERIC    CON  TROVERS  Y Concluded. 

GENERAL   SUMMARY.1 

I.  HAVING  taken  this  general  survey  of  the  most  important  arguments 
for  and  against  Wolf's  hypothesis  concerning  the  origin  of  the  poems  of 
Homer,  the  following  may  be  regarded  as  the  most  probable  conclusion. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  seed  of  the  Homeric  poems  was  scattered 
in  the  time  of  the  heroic  exploits  which  they  celebrate,  and  in  the  land 
of  the  victorious  Achseans,  that  is,  in  European  Greece.     An  abundance 
of  heroic  lays  preserved  the  records  of  the  Trojan  war.     It  was  a  puerile 
idea,  which  is  now  completely  exploded,  that  the  events  are  fictitious  on 
which  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  are  based,  and  that  a  Trojan  war  never 
was  waged. 

II.  Europe  must  necessarily  have  been  the  country  where  these  songs 
originated,  both  because  here  the  victorious  heroes  dwelt,  and  because  so 
many  traces  in  the  poems  still  point  to  these  regions.    It  was  here,  more 
over,  that  the  old  Thracian  bards  had  effected  that  unity  of  mythology 
which,  spreading  all  over  Greece,  had  gradually  absorbed  and  obliterated 
the  discrepancies  of  the  old  local  myths,  and  substituted  one  general  my 
thology  for  the  whole  nation,  with  Jove  as  the  supreme  ruler,  dwelling 
on  the  snowy  heights  of  Olympus.     Impregnated  with  this  European  my 
thology,  the  heroic  lays  were  brought  to  Asia  Minor  by  the  Greek  colo 
nies,  which  left  the  mother  country  about  three  ages  after  the  Trojan  war. 

III.  In  European  Greece,  a  new  race  gained  the  ascendency,  the  Do 
rians,  foreign  to  those  who  gloried  in  having  the  old  heroes  among  their 
ancestors.     The  heroic  songs,  therefore,  died  away  more  and  more  in 
Europe ;  but  in  Asia  the  ^Eolians  fought,  conquered,  and  settled  nearly 
in  the  same  regions  in  which  their  fathers  had  signalized  themselves  by 
immortal  exploits,  the  glory  of  which  was  celebrated,  and  their  memory 
still  preserved  by  their  national  bards.     Their  dwelling  in  the  same  local 
ity  not  only  kept  alive  the  remembrance  of  the  deeds  of  their  fathers,  but 
gave  a  new  impulse  to  their  poetry,  just  as,  in  the  Middle  Ages  in  Ger 
many,  the  foundation  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Hungarians  in  the  East,  and 
their  destructive  invasions,  together  with  the  origin  of  a  new  empire  of 
the  Burgundians  in  the  West,  awakened  the  old  songs  of  the  Niebelun- 
gen,  after  a  slumber  of  centuries.2 

IV.  Now  the  Homeric  poems  advanced  a  step  farther.     From  uncon 
nected  songs  they  were  for  the  first  time  united  by  a  great  genius,  who, 
whether  he  was  really  called  Homer,  or  whether  the  name  be  of  later 

1  Ihne,  p.  507,  se.q.  2  Gervinus,  Poetical  Lit.  of  Germ.,  vol.  i.,  p.  108. 

c 


50  G  K  K  E  K     L  1  T  E  R  A  T  U  R  K . 

origin,  and  significant  of  his  work  of  uniting  songs,1  was  the  one  individual 
who  conceived  in  mind  the  lofty  idea  of  that  poetical  unity  which  we  can 
not  help  acknowledging  and  admiring.  What  were  the  peculiar  excel 
lencies  which  distinguished  this  one  Homer  among  a  great  number  of 
contemporary  poets,  and  saved  his  works  alone  from  oblivion,  we  do  not 
venture  to  determine;  but  the  conjecture  of  Miiller2  is  not  improbable, 
that  Homer  first  undertook  to  combine  into  one  great  unity  the  scattered 
and  fragmentary  poems  of  earlier  bards,  and  that  it  was  this  task  which 
established  his  great  renown. 

V.  We  can  now  judge  of  the  probability  that  Homer  was  an  Ionian, 
who  in  Smyrna,  where  lonians  and  2Eolians  were  mixed  together,  be 
came  acquainted  with  the  subject  of  his  poems,  and  moulded  them  into 
the  form  which  was  suited  to  the  taste  of  his  Ionian  countrymen.     But 
as  a  faithful  preservation  of  these  long  works  was  impossible  in  an  age 
unacquainted  with,  or,  at  least,  not  versed  in  the  art  of  writing,  it  was  a 
natural  consequence  that,  in  the  lapse  of  ages,  the  poems  should  not  only 
lose  their  purity,  but  should  also  become  more  and  more  dismembered, 
and  thus  return  into  their  original  state  of  loose,  independent  songs. 
Their  public  recitation  became  more  and  more  fragmentary,  and  the  time 
at  festivals  and  musical  contests,  formerly  occupied  by  epic  rhapsodists 
exclusively,  was  encroached  upon  by  the  rising  lyric  performances  and 
players  on  the  flute  and  lyre. 

VI.  Yet  the  knowledge  of  the  unity  of  the  different  Homeric  rhapso 
dies  was  not  entirely  lost.     Solon,  himself  a  poet,  directed  the  attention 
of  his  countrymen  toward  it ;  and  Pisistratus  at  last  raised  a  lasting 
monument  to  his  high  merits,  in  fixing  the  genuine  Homeric  poems  by 
the  indelible  marks  of  writing,  as  far  as  was  possible  in  his  time  and  with 
his  means.     That,  previous  to  the  famous  edition  of  Pisistratus,  parts  of 
Homer,  or  the  entire  poems,  were  committed  to  writing  in  other  towns 
of  Greece  or  Asia  Minor  is  not  improbable,  but  we  do  .not  possess  suffi 
cient  testimonies  to  prove  it.     We  can,  therefore,  safely  affirm  that  from 
the  time  of  Pisistratus  the  Greeks  had  a  written  Homer,  a  regular  text, 
the  source  and  foundation  of  all  subsequent  editions.3 

1  Wdcker,  Ep.  Cycl,  vol.  i.,  p.  125, 128  ;  Ugen,  Hymn.  Horn.,  praf.,  p.  23  ;  Heyne  ad  II.. 
vol.  viii.,  p.  795,  &c. 

2  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  47.     Compare  Nitzsch,  Anm.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  £6. 

3  The  following  list  of  the  principal  authors  who  have  advocated,  in  whole  or  for  the 
most  part,  the  doctrines  of  Wolf,  may  not  be  unacceptable  to  the  student.    It  is  from 
Mure  (Hist.  Crit.,  vol.  i.,  p.  202),  and  will  be  found  complete  enough  for  all  ordinary  pur 
poses  :  C.  F.  Franceson,  Essai  sur  la  question,  si  Homtre,  &e. ;  F.  Schlegel,  Gcsch.  der 
Ep.  DicJitk.,vni. ;  Heyne,  Obs.  ad  II.  (who  claims,  however,  the  right  of  prior  discovery) ; 
W.  Mutter,  Homer.  Vorschule ;  B.  Thiersch,  Urgestalt  der  Ody&sce ;  Hermann,  Opusc.,  vol. 
v.,  p.  52,  scqq. ;  vol.  vi.,  p.  70,  seqq.;  Ritschl,  Die  Alexandria.  Biblioth. ;  Lachmann,  Bc- 
trachtungen  iiber  die  I  lias  ;  Grote,  History  of  Greece,  vol.  ii.,  ch.  23. 

The  following  are  such  as  have  entertained  middle  or  opposite  views  :  Ste.  Croix,  Ref 
utation,  <$•<;.,  de  M.  Wolf;  Hug,  Erfindung  der  Buchsiabenschrift;  Krcuser,  Vorfragen  uber 
Homer;  Clinton,  Fast.  HeU.,\ol.  i..  p.  366,  seqq. ;  Coleridge,  Introd.  to  the  Study  of  the 
Gr.  Classics;  Quarterly  Review,  vol.  xliv.,  p.  121,  seqq.  (article  by  Milman)  ;  Welder,  Der 
Epischc  Cyclus,  vol.  i.,  p.  122,  seqq. ;  K.  0.  Miiller,  Hist,  of  Gr.  Lit. ;  Ihne  (Smith's  Diet 
Biogr.)  ;  Thirlwall,  Hist,  of  Greece,  appendix  to  vol.  i.,  2d  ed. ;  Payne  Knight,  Prolegom 
in  Horn. ;  \itzscti.  De  Hist.  Hnmeri  (and  other  works  already  cited  bv  us). 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  51 


CHAPTER  IX. 
SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 

HOMERIC     HYMNS     AND     MINOR     POEMS.1 

I.  As  certain  hymns,  which  were  known  and  admired  in  a  more  ad 
vanced  literary  period,  were  ascribed  to  the  mythical  bards,  such  as  Olen, 
Orpheus,  Linus,  and  Musseus,  so  many  minor  poems,  consisting  of  hymns 
and  humorous  effusions,  have  been  attributed  to  the  author  of  the  Iliad 
and  Odyssey.    Besides  these  there  are  a  few  short  addresses  to  cities  or 
private  persons,  which  have  been  entitled  Epigrams. 

II.  The  Hymns,  including  the  hymn  to  Ceres  and  the  fragment  to 
Bacchus,  which  were  discovered  in  the  last  century  at  Moscow,  and  edit 
ed  by  Ruhnken,  amount  to  thirty-three.    There  are  six  longer,  and  twenty- 
seven  shorter  ones.    They  were  called  by  the  ancients  irpoolfjua,  i.  e.,  over 
tures  or  preludes,  and  were  sung  by  the  rhapsodists  as  introductions  to  epic 
poems  at  the  festivals  of  the  respective  gods,  to  whom  they  are  addressed. 
To  these  rhapsodists  the  hymns  most  probably  owe  their  origin.    Accord 
ing  to  Miiller,2  they  exhibit  such  a  diversity  of  language  and  poetical  tone, 
that  in  all  probability  they  contain  fragments  from  every  century,  from 
the  time  of  Homer  to  the  Persian  war. 

III.  Still,  most  of  them  were  reckoned  to  be  Homeric  productions  by 
those  who  lived  in  a  time  when  Greek  literature  still  flourished.    This  is 
easily  accounted  for.     Being  recited  in  connection  with  Homeric  poems, 
they  were  gradually  attributed  to  the  same  author,  and  continued  to  be  so 
regarded  more  or  less  generally,  till  critics,  and  particularly  those  of  Alex- 
andrea,  discovered  the  differences  between  their  style  and  that  of  Homer. 
At  Alexandrea  they  were  never  reckoned  genuine,  which  accounts  for 
the  circumstance  that  no  one  of  the  great  critics  of  that  school  is  known 
to  have  made  a  regular  collection  of  them.3 

IV.  Of  the  hymns  now  extant  five  deserve  particular  attention,  on  ac 
count  of  their  greater  length  and  mythological  contents  ;  they  are  those 
addressed  to  the  Delian  and  Pythian  Apollo,  to  Mercury,  Ceres,  and  Venus. 
The  hymn  to  the  Delian  Apollo,  formerly  regarded  as  part  of  the  one  to 
the  Pythian  Apollo,  is  the  work  of  a  Homerid  of  Chios,  and  approaches  so 
nearly  to  the  true  Homeric  tone,  that  the  author,  who  calls  himself  the 
blind  poet,  who  lived  in  the  rocky  Chios,  was  held  even  by  Thucydides  to 
be  Homer  himself.     It  narrates  the  birth  of  Apollo  in  Delos,  but  a  great 
part  of  it  is  lost. 

V.  The  hymn  to  the  Pythian  Apollo  contains  the  foundation  of  the 
Pythian  sanctuary  by  the  god  himself,  who  slays  the  serpent,  and,  in  the 
form  of  a  dolphin,  leads  certain  men  to  Crissa,  whom  he  establishes  as 
priests  of  his  temple. 

VI.  The  hymn  to  Mercury,  which,  on  account  of  its  mentioning  the 

»  Ihne,  p.  508.  2  jjist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  74.  3  Wolf,  Proleff.,  p.  266. 


52  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

seven-stringed  lyre,  the  invention  of  Terpander,  can  not  have  been  com 
posed  before  the  30th  Olympiad,  relates  the  tricks  of  the  new-born  Mer 
cury,  who,  having  left  his  cradle,  drove  away  the  cattle  of  Apollo  from 
their  pastures  in  Pieria  to  Pylos,  there  killed  two,  and  then  invented  the 
lyre,  made  of  a  tortoise-shell,  with  which  he  pacified  the  anger  of  Apollo. 

VII.  The  hymn  to  Venus  celebrates  the  birth  of  --Eneas  in  a  style  not 
very  different  from  that  of  Homer.    The  hymn  to  Ceres,  first  discovered 
in  1778,  in  Moscow,  by  Matthsei,  and  first  published  by  Rulmken  in  1780, 
gives  an  account  of  Ceres's  search  after  her  daughter  Proserpina,  who 
had  been  carried  away  by  Pluto.    The  goddess  obtains  from  Jupiter  that 
her  daughter  should  pass  only  one  third  part  of  the  year  with  Pluto,  and 
return  to  her  for  the  rest  of  the  year.     With  this  symbolical  description 
of  the  corn,  which,  when  sown,  remains  for  some  time  under  ground,  and 
then  springs  up,  the  poet  has  connected  the  mythology  of  the  Eleusinians, 
who  hospitably  received  the  goddess  on  her  wanderings,  afterward  built 
her  a  temple,  and  were  rewarded  by  instruction  in  the  mysterious  rites 
of  Ceres. 

VIII.  Another  poem,  of  quite  a  different  nature  from  the  hymns,  was 
also  erroneously  ascribed  to  Homer.     This  was  the  Margites  (Mapyir^s), 
a  poem  which  Aristotle  regarded  as  the  source  of  comedy,  just  as  he  called 
the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  the  fountain  of  all  tragic  poetry.     From  this  view 
of  Aristotle  we  may  judge  of  the  nature  of  the  poem.    It  ridiculed  a  man 
who  was  said  "  to  know  many  things,  and  to  know  all  badly."    The  sub 
ject  was  nearly  related  to  the  scurrilous  and  satirical  poetry  of  Archilo- 
chus  and  other  contemporary  iambographers,  although  in  versification, 
epic  tone,  and  language  it  imitated  the  Iliad.     The  iambic  verses  which 
are  quoted  from  it  by  the  grammarians  were  most  likely  interspersed  by 
Pigres,  brother  of  Artemisia,  who  is  also  called  the  author  of  this  poem, 
and  who  interpolated  the  Iliad  with  pentameters  in  a  similar  manner. 

IX.  The  same  Pigres  was  perhaps  the  author  of  the  Batrachomyomachia 
(EaTpaxofj.vofj.axia},  or  the  Battle  of  the  Frogs  and  Mice,1  a  poem  frequent 
ly  ascribed  by  the  ancients  to  Homer.     It  is  a  harmless,  playful  tale, 
without  a  marked  tendency  to  sarcasm  and  satire,  amusing  as  a  parody, 
but  without  any  great  poetical  merit  which  could  justify  its  being  ascribed 
to  the  author  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey.    Knight2  infers,  from  the  employ 
ment  of  the  word  SeAros  as  a  writing  tablet,  instead  of  SiQOepa,  a  skin, 
which,  according  to  Herodotus,  was  the  material  employed  by  the  Asiatic 
Greeks  for  that  purpose,  that  this  poem  was  an  offspring  of  Attic  ingenu 
ity  ;  and,  moreover,  that  the  familiar  mention  of  the  cock  (v.  191)  affords 
a  strong  argument  in  favor  of  its  late  origin. 

X.  Besides  these  poems  there  were  a  great  many  more,  most  of  which 
we  know  only  by  name,  which  we  find  attributed  to  Homer  with  more  or 
less  confidence.     But  we  have  good  reason  for  doubting  all  such  state 
ments  concerning  lost  poems,  whose  claims  we  can  not  examine,  when 
we  see  that  even  Thucydides  and  Aristotle  considered  as  genuine  not  only 
such  poems  as  the  Margites,  and  some  of  the  hymns,  but  also  all  those 
passages  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  which  are  evidently  interpolated,  and 

1  Suid.,  s.r.  ;  Pint.,  De  Malifn.  Herod.,  43.  2  Prolegom.  in  Homerum,  6  6. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  53 

which  at  the  present  day  nobody  would  dream  of  ascribing  to  their  re 
puted  author.1 

XI.  The  time  in  which  Greek  literature  flourished  was  not  adapted  for 
tracing  out  the  poems  which  were  spurious  and  interpolated.  People  en 
joyed  all  that  was  beautiful,  without  caring  who  was  the  author.  The 
task  of  sifting  and  correcting  the  works  of  literature  was  left  to  the  age 
in  which  the  faculties  of  the  Greek  mind  had  ceased  to  produce  original 
works,  and  had  turned  to  scrutinize  and  preserve  former  productions. 
Then  it  was  not  only  discovered  that  the  cyclic  poems  and  the  hymns  had 
no  title  to  be  styled  "  Homeric,"  but  the  question  was  mooted  and  warm 
ly  discussed  whether  the  Odyssey  was  to  be  attributed  to  the  author  of 
the  Iliad.  Of  the  existence  of  this  interesting  controversy  we  had  only  a 
slight  indication  in  Seneca,2  before  the  publication  of  the  Venetian  scholia. 
From  these  we  know  now  that  there  was  a  regular  party  of  critics,  who 
assigned  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  to  two  different  authors,  and  were  there 
fore  called  Chorizontes  (Xo>pi£bj/Tes),  "  the  Separators."3  The  question  has 
been  again  opened  in  modern  times,  and  we  have  already  considered  it. 


CHAPTER  X. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 
HISTORY     OF     THE     HOMERIC     POEMS.* 

I.  THE  history  of  the  Homeric  poems  may  be  divided  conveniently  into 
two  great  periods :  one  in  which  the  text  was  transmitted  by  oral  tradi 
tion,  and  the  other  of  the  written  text  after  Pisistratus.     Of  the  former 
we  have  already  spoken  ;  it,  therefore,  only  remains  to  treat  of  the  latter. 

II.  The  epoch  from  Pisistratus  down  to  the  establishment  of  the  first 
critical  school  at  Alexandrea,  that  is,  to  Zenodotus,  presents  very  few 
facts  concerning  the  Homeric  poems.     Oral  tradition  still  prevailed  over 
writing  for  a  long  time  ;  though  in  the  days  of  Alcibiades  it  was  expected 
that  every  schoolmaster  would  have  a  copy  of  Homer  with  which  to  teach 
his  boys.5    Homer  became  a  sort  of  ground- work  for  a  liberal  education ; 
and  as  his  influence  over  the  minds  of  the  people  thus  became  still  stron 
ger,  the  philosophers  of  that  age  were  naturally  led  either  to  explain  and 
recommend,  or  to  oppose  and  refute  the  moral  principles  and  religious 
doctrines  contained  in  the  heroic  tales.6 

III.  It  was  with  this  practical  view  that  Pythagoras,  Xenophanes,  and 
Heraclltus  condemned  Homer  as  one  who  uttered  falsehoods,  and  de 
graded  the  majesty  of  the  gods  ;  while  Theagenes,  Metrodorus,  Anaxag- 
oras,  and  Stesimbrotus  expounded  the  deep  wisdom  of  Homer,  which  was 
disguised  from  the  eyes  of  the  common  observer  under  the  vail  of  an  ap 
parently  insignificant  tale.     So  old  is  the  allegorical  explanation,  a  folly 
at  which  the  sober  Socrates  smiled,  which  Plato  refuted,  and  Aristarchus 

1  Nitzsch,  Anm.  z.  Odyss.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  40.  2  De  Brevit.  Vitas,  13. 

3  Grauert,  uber  d.  Horn.  Choriz.  Rhein.  Mus.,  vol.  i.  *  Ihne,  p.  510,  seqq. 

*  Pint.,  Alcib.,  p.  194,  D.  6  Grafenkan,  Gesch.  der  rhilologie,  vol.  i.,  p.  202. 


54  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

opposed  with  all  his  might,  but  which,  nevertheless,  outlived  the  sound 
critical  study  of  Homer  among  the  Greeks,  and  has  thriven  luxuriantly 
even  down  to  the  present  day. 

IV.  A  more  scientific  study  was  bestowed  on  Homer  by  the  sophists 
of  Pericles's  age,  Prodicus,  Protagoras,  Hippias,  and  others.     There  are 

I  even  traces  which  seem  to  indicate  that  the  airopiai  and  Auo-ets,  such  favor- 
I  ite  themes  with  the  Alexandrine  critics,  originated  with  these  sophists. 
j  Thus  the  study  of  Homer  increased,  and  the  copies  of  his  works  must 
naturally  have  been  more  and  more  multiplied.  We  may  suppose  that 
not  a  few  of  the  literary  men  of  that  age  carefully  compared  the  best  MSS. 
within  their  reach,  and,  choosing  what  they  thought  best,  made  new  edi 
tions  (Siopedxreis1).  The  task  of  these  first  editors  was  not  an  easy  one. 
It  may  be  concluded. from  the  nature  of  the  case,  and  it  is  known  by  vari 
ous  testimonies,  that  the  text  of  those  days  offered  enormous  discrepan 
cies,  not  paralleled  in  the  text  of  any  other  classical  writer.  There  were 
passages  left  out,  transposed,  added,  or  so  altered  as  not  easily  to  be  rec 
ognized  ;  nothing,  in  short,  like  a  smooth  vulgate  existed  before  the  time 
of  the  Alexandrine  critics. 

V.  This  state  of  the  text  must  have  presented  immense  difficulties  to 
the  first  editors  in  the  infancy  of  criticism.     Yet  these  early  editions  were 
valuable  to  the  Alexandreans,  as  being  derived  from  good  and  ancient 
sources.     Two  only  are  known  to  us  through  the  scholia,  one  of  the  poet 
Antimachus,  and  the  famous  one  of  Aristotle  (77  £K  rov  j/apflrj/cos),  which 
Alexander  the  Great  used  to  carry  about  with  him  in  a  splendid  case 
(vapQi)£)  on  all  his  expeditions.     Besides  these  editions,  called  in  the  scho 
lia  at  /car'  aVSpa,  there  were  several  other  old  SiopQcfxreis  at  Alexandrea, 
under  the  name  of  at  Kara  Tr^Aets,  or  ate  e'/c  Tr^Aeco^,  or  at  TroAm/cat.      We 
know  six  of  them,  those  of  Massilia,  Chios,  Argos,  Sinope,  Cyprus,  and 
Crete.     It  is  hardly  likely  that  they  were  made  by  public  authority  in  the 
different  states  whose  names  they  bear  ;  on  the  contrary,  as  the  persons 
who  had  made  them  were  unknown,  they  were  called,  just  as  manuscripts 
are  now,  from  the  places  where  they  had  been  found. 

VI.  All  these  editions,  however,  were  only  preparatory  to  the  estab 
lishment  of  a  regular  and  systematic  criticism  and  interpretation  of  Ho 
mer,  which  began  with  Zenodotus  at  Alexandrea.     For  such  a  task  the 
times  after  Alexander  were  quite  fit.     Life  had  fled  from  the  literature 
of  the  Greeks  ;  it  was  become  a  dead  body,  and  was  very  properly  car 
ried  into  Egypt,  there  to  be  embalmed,  and  safely  preserved  for  many  en 
suing  centuries.     It  was  the  task  of  men,  who,  like  Aristarchus,  could 
judge  of  poetry  without  being  able  to  write  any  themselves,  to  preserve 
carefully  that  which  was  extant,  to  clear  it  from  all  stains  and  corrup 
tions,  and  to  explain  what  was  no  longer  rooted  in  and  connected  with 
the  institutions  of  a  free  political  life,  and  therefore  was  become  unintel- 

'  ligible  to  all  but  the  learned. 

VII.  Three  men,  who  stand  in  the  relation  of  masters  and  pupils,  were 
at  the  head  of  a  numerous  host  of  scholars,  who  directed  their  attention 
either  occasionally  or  exclusively  to  the  study  and  criticism  of  the  Ho- 

1  Compare  Wolf,  Prolegom.,  p.  174. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  55 

meric  poems.  Zenodotus  laid  the  foundation  of  systematic  criticism  by 
establishing  two  rules  for  purifying  the  corrupted  text.  He  threw  out : 
1st,  whatever  was  contradictory  to,  or  not  necessarily  connected  with, 
the  whole  of  the  work ;  2d,  what  seemed  unworthy  of  the  genius  of  the 
author.  To  these  two  rules  his  followers,  Aristophanes  and  Aristarchus, 
added  two  more ;  they  rejected,  3d,  what  was  contrary  or  foreign  to  the 
customs  of  the  Homeric  Age  ;  and,  4th,  what  did  not  agree  with  the  epic 
language  and  versification. 

VIII.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  Zenodotus,  in  his  first  attempt, 
did  not  reach  the  summit  of  perfection.     The  manner  in  which  he  cut 
out  long  passages,  arbitrarily  altered  others,  transposed,  and,  in  short, 
corrected  Homer's  text  as  he  would  have  done  his  own,  seemed  shock 
ing  to  all  sober  critics  of  later  times,  and  would  have  proved  very  injuri 
ous  to  the  text,  had  not  Aristophanes,  and  still  more  Aristarchus,  acted 
on  sounder  principles,  and  thus  put  a  stop  to  the  arbitrary  system  of 
Zenodotus.     Aristophanes  of  Byzantium,  a  man  of  vast  learning,  seems 
to  have  been  more  occupied  with  the  other  parts  of  Greek  literature, 
particularly  the  comic  poets,  than  with  Homer.     He  inserted  in  his  edi 
tion  many  of  the  verses  which  had  been  thrown  out  by  Zenodotus,  and 
in  many  respects  laid  the  foundations  for  what  his  pupil  Aristarchus  ex 
ecuted. 

IX.  The  reputation  of  Aristarchus  as  the  prince  of  grammarians  was 
so  great  throughout  the  whole  of  antiquity,  that,  before  the  publication  of 
the  Venetian  scholia  by  Villoison,  we  hardly  knew  how  to  account  for  it. 
But  these  excellent  scholia,  which  have  chiefly  enabled  us  to  understand 
the  origin  of  the  Homeric  poems,  teach  us  also  to  appreciate  their  great 
and  unrivalled  interpreter,  and  have  now  generally  led  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  highest  aim  of  the  ambition  of  modern  critics  with  respect  to  Ho 
mer  is  to  restore  the  edition  of  Aristarchus,  an  undertaking  which  is  be 
lieved  to  be  possible  by  one  of  the  most  competent  judges,  chiefly  through 
the  assistance  afforded  by  these  scholia.1 

X.  The  Obelus  (o/3eA<k),  one  of  the  critical  marks  used  by  Aristarchus 
(-T-),  and  invented,  like  the  accents,  by  his  master  Aristophanes,  was  used 
for  the  aOeryois,  i.  e.,  to  mark  those  verses  which  seemed  improper  and 
detrimental  to  the  beauty  of  the  poem,  but  which  Aristarchus  dared  not 
throw  out  of  the  text,  as  it  was  impossible  to  determine  whether  they 
were  to  be  ascribed  to  an  accidental  carelessness  of  the  author,  or  to  in 
terpolations  of  rhapsodists.     Those  verses  which  Aristarchus  was  con 
vinced  were  spurious  he  left  out  of  his  edition  altogether.     Aristarchus 
was  in  constant  opposition  to  Crates  of  Mallus,  the  founder  of  the  Perga- 
menian  school  of  grammar.     This  Crates  had  the  merit  of  transplanting 
the  study  of  literature  to  Rome. 

XI.  In  the  time  of  Augustus,  the  great  compiler,  Didymus,  wrote  most 
comprehensive  commentaries  on  Homer,  copying  mostly  the  works  of 
preceding  Alexandrean  grammarians,  which  had  swollen  to  an  enormous 
extent.     Under  Tiberius,  Apollonius  Sophista  lived,  whose  Lexicon  Ho- 
mericum  is  very  valuable.     Apion,  a  pupil  of  Didymus,  was  of  much  less 

1    Lchrs,  Tic  Arislarclii  Studiis  Homrricis,  1833. 


56 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


importance  than  is  generally  believed,  chiefly  on  the  authority  of  Wolf, 
he  was  a  great  quack  and  an  impudent  boaster.  Longinus  and  his  pupil, 
Porphyrius,  of  whom  we  possess  some  tolerably  good  scholia,  were  of 
more  value.  The  Homeric  scholia  are  dispersed  in  various  MSS.  Com 
plete  collections  do  not  exist,  nor  are  they  desirable,  as  many  of  them 
are  utterly  useless.  The  most  valuable  scholia  on  the  Iliad  are  those  al 
ready  referred  to,  which  were  published  by  Villoison  from  a  MS.  of  the 
tenth  century,  in  the  library  of  St.  Mark  at  Venice,  together  with  the  scho 
lia  to  the  Iliad  previously  published,  Ven.,  1788,  fol.  These  scholia  were 
reprinted  with  additions,  edited  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1825,  2  vols.  4to,  with 
an  appendix,  1826,  which  collection  contains  all  that  is  worth  reading. 
A  few  additions  are  to  be  found  in  Bachmann's  Scholia  ad  Homeri  Iliadcm, 
Lips.,  1835.  The  most  valuable  scholia  to  the  Odyssey  are  those  publish 
ed  by  Buttmann,  Berl.,  1821,  mostly  taken  from  the  scholia  originally  pub 
lished  by  Mai,  from  a  MS.  at  Milan,  in  1819.  The  extensive  commenta 
ry  of  Eustathius  is  a  compilation  destitute  of  judgment  and  of  taste,  but 
contains  much  valuable  information  from  sources  which  are  now  lost. 

EDITIONS    OF    HOMER.1 

XII.  The  old  editions  of  Homer,  as  well  as  the  MSS.,  are  of  very  little  importance  for 
the  restoration  of  the  text,  for  which  we  must  apply  to  the  scholia.    The  Editio  Princeps, 
by  Demetrius  Chalcondylas,  Flor.,  1488,  fol.,  was  the  first  large  work  printed  in  Greek, 
one  psalm  only,  and  the  Batrachomyomachia,  having  preceded     This  edition  was  fre 
quently  reprinted.    Wolf  reckons  scarcely  seven  critical  editions  from  the  Editio  Prin 
ceps  to  his  time.    That  of  H.  Stephanus,  in  Poet.  Graec.  Princ.  her.  Carm.,  Paris,  1566. 
fol.,  was  one  of  the  best.    In  England,  the  edition  of  Barnes,  Cantab.,  1711,  2  vols.  4to  ; 
and  that  of  Clarke,  who  published  the  Iliad  in  1729,  and  the  Odyssey  in  1740,  were  gen 
erally  used  for  a  long  time,  and  often  reprinted.    The  latter  was  published,  with  addi 
tions  by  Ernesti,  Lips.,  1759-1764,  5  vols.  8vo.    This  edition  was  reprinted  at  Glasgow, 
with  Wolf's  Prolegomena,  in  1814,  and  again  at  Leipzig,  in  1824. 

XIII.  A  new  period  began  with  Wolf's  second  edition,  Homeri  et  Homeridarum  Op.  et 
Rel.,Halis,  1794,  the  first  edition  (1784  and  1785)  being  merely  a  copy  of  the  vulgate. 
Along  with  the  second  edition  were  published  the  Prolegomena.    A  third  edition  was 
published  from  1804-1807.    It  is  very  much  to  be  regretted  that  the  editions  of  Wolf  are 
without  commentaries  or  critical  notes,  so  that  it  is  impossible  to  know  in  many  cases 
on  what  grounds  he  adopted  his  readings,  which  differ  from  the  vulgate.    Heyne  began 
in  1802  to  publish  the  Iliad,  which  was  finished  in  eight  volumes,  and  was  most  severely 
and  unsparingly  reviewed  by  Wolf,  Voss,  and  Eichstadt,  in  the  Jenaer  Literatur  Zeitung, 
1803.    A  ninth  volume,  containing  the  Indices,  was  published  by  Graefenhan  in  1822. 

XIV.  The  best  recension  of  the  text  of  Homer  is  that  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1843.    A  very 
good  edition  of  the  Iliad,  with  critical  notes,  was  given  by  Spitzner,  Gotha,  1832-1836, 
but  the  author  did  not  live  to  publish  his  explanatory  commentary.    There  is  an  excel 
lent  commentary  to  the  two  first  books  of  the  Iliad  by  Freytag,  Petersburg,  1837,  and  a 
more  extensive  one  by  Stadelmann,  of  which  two  volumes  have  appeared,  Leipzig,  1840- 
1844.    But  the  best  of  all  commentaries  which  have  yet  appeared  on  the  Homeric  po 
ems  are  those  of  Nitzsch  on  the  Odyssey,  Hanover,  1825,  &c.,  of  which  the  three  volumes 
now  published  extend  only  as  far  as  the  twelfth  book.    The  latest  edition  of  Homer  for 
general  readers  is  that  from  the  press  of  Didot,  Paris,  1838,  containing  also  the  Cyclic 
fragments.    It  has  a  corrected  Latin  version,  but  no  commentary.    There  is  a  good 
school  edition  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey,  with  German  notes  by  Crusius,  Hanover,  1840 
1842. 

XV.  The  most  valuable  of  the  separate  editions  of  the  Hymns  are  those  by  Ilgen,  Hal., 
1791,  and  Hermann,  Lips.,  1806.    Tho  Lexicon  Novum  Homericum  (et  Pindaricum)  of 
Damm,  originally  published  at  Berlin  in  1765,  and  reprinted  at  London,  1827,  is  still  of 

*  Ifme,  p.  511. 


P  O  E  T  I  C  A  L    P  E  R  I O  D.  57 

some  value,  though  the  author  was  destitute  of  all  sound  principles  of  criticism.  But  a 
far  more  important  work  for  the  student  is  Buttmann's  Lexilogus,  Berlin,  1825  and  1837, 
translated  by  Fishlake,  London,  1840, 2d  ed.  A  complete  account  of  the  literature  of  the 
Homeric  poems  will  be  found  in  the  Bibliotheca  Homerica,  Hal.,  1837,  and  in  the  notes  to 
the  first  volume  of  Bode's  Geschichte  der  Hellenischen  Dichtkunst. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

SECOND   OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 
CYCLIC    POETS.1 

I.  THE  Iliad  and  Odyssey  contained  only  a  small  part  of  the  copious 
traditions  concerning  the  Trojan  war.     A  great  number  of  poets  under 
took  to  fill  up,  by  separate  poems,  the  whole  cycle  (/ctfoAos)  of  the  events 
of  this  war,  from  which  circumstance  they  are  commonly  styled  the  Cy 
clic  poets  (Ku/cAt/coi).     The  series  terminated  with  the  death  of  Ulysses, 
this  event  being  regarded  as  the  closing  scene  of  the  cycle. 

II.  The  Cyclic  poems,  both  in  their  character  and  conception  of  the 
mythical  events,  were  very  different  from  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey.     These 
Cyclic  authors  can  not  even  have  been  called  Homeridae,  since  a  class  of 
persons  bearing  this  name  existed  only  in  Chios,  and  not  one  of  the  Cy 
clic  bards  is  called  a  Chian.     It  is  probable  that  they  were  Homeric 
rhapsodists  by  profession,  to  whom  the  constant  recitation  of  the  ancient 
Homeric  poems  would  naturally  suggest  the  notion  of  continuing  them 
by  essays  of  their  own  in  a  similar  tone. 

III.  From  a  close  comparison  of  the  extracts  and  fragments  of  these 
poems,  which  we  still  possess,  it  is  evident  that  their  authors  had  before 
them  copies  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  in  their  complete  form,  or,  to 
speak  more  accurately,  comprehending  the  same  series  of  events  as  those 
current  among  the  later  Greeks  and  ourselves,  and  that  they  merely  con 
nected  the  action  of  their  own  poems  with  the  beginning  and  the  end  of 
these  two  epopees.     But,  notwithstanding  the  close  connection  which 
they  made  between  their  own  productions  and  the  Homeric  poems,  and 
notwithstanding  that  they  often  built  upon  particular  allusions  in  Homer, 
and  formed  from  them  long  passages  of  their  own  poems,  still  their  man 
ner  of  treating  and  viewing  mythical  subjects  differs  so  widely  from  that 
of  Homer,  as  of  itself  to  be  a  sufficient  proof  that  the  Homeric  poems 
were  no  longer  in  progress  of  development  at  the  time  of  the  Cyclic  po 
ets,  but  had,  on  the  whole,  attained  a  settled  form,  to  which  no  additions 
of  importance  were  afterward  made. 

IV.  The  CvpRiA2  (TO  KvTrpia  eirrj),  in  eleven  books,  was  the  first,  in  the 
order  of  the  events  contained  in  it,  of  the  poems  of  the  Epic  Cycle  relat 
ing  to  the  Trojan  war.     It  embraced  the  period  antecedent  to  the  begin 
ning  of  the  Iliad,  to  which  it  was  evidently  designed  to  form  an  introduc 
tion.     From  the  outline  given  by  Proclus,  and  from  the  extant  fragments, 
a  good  idea  may  be  formed  of  its  structure  and  contents.     The  Earth, 

1  Midler,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  64,  seqq.     Compare  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  248,  seqq. ; 
Welcker,  Der  epische  Cyclus,  &c. 
3  Smitk,  Diet.  Biogr.,  .?.  v.  Stasinus;  Welckfr,  vol.  ii.,  p.  85,  seqq. 


58  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

wearied  with  the  burden  of  the  degenerate  race  of  man,  entreats  Jupitei 
to  diminish  their  numbers.  He  grants  her  request,  and  prepares  two 
chief  agents  to  accomplish  it,  Helen  and  Achilles,  the  beauty  of  the  for 
mer  furnishing  the  cause  of  the  contest,  and  the  sword  of  the  latter  the 
instrument  of  extermination.  The  events  succeeding  the  birth  of  Helen, 
or,  rather  (for  the  form  of  the  myth  is  varied),  her  being  sent  by  Jupiter 
to  Leda  to  bring  up,  and  the  marriage  of  Peleus,  down  to  the  sailing  of 
the  expedition  against  Troy,  were  related  at  great  length,  and  the  inci 
dents  of  the  war  itself  much  more  briefly,  the  latter  part  being  apparent 
ly  occupied  chiefly  with  those  previous  adventures  of  the  heroes  which 
are  referred  to  in  the  Iliad.  It  concluded  with  the  following  somewhat 
clumsy  contrivance  to  connect  it  with  the  opening  of  the  Iliad  :  the  war 
itself  is  not  found  to  be  murderous  enough  to  accomplish  the  object 
prayed  for  by  Earth,  and  in  order  to  effect  it  more  surely,  the  fresh  con 
tention  between  Achilles  and  Agamemnon  is  stirred  up  by  Jupiter. 

V.  The  Cypria  was  attributed  by  some  of  the  ancient  writers  to  STASI 
NUS  (Sroo-Tvos)  of  Cyprus,  but  the  statements  on  the  subject  are  so  vari 
ous,  and  partake  so  much  of  conjecture,  that  no  certain  conclusion  can 
be  drawn  from  them.     In  the  earliest  historical  period  of  Greek  litera 
ture,  and  before  critical  inquiries  began,  the  poem  was  accepted  without 
question  as  a  work  of  Homer.     It  is  not  till  we  come  down  to  the  times 
of  Athenaeus  and  the  grammarians  that  we  find  any  mention  of  Stasinus, 
and  even  then  the  Cypria  is  ascribed  to  him  in  a  very  hesitating  and  in 
definite  manner.1     Proclus,  who  is  our  chief  authority  for  the  history  of 
the  epic  cycle,2  not  only  tells  us  that  the  poem  was  ascribed  to  Stasinus, 
or  Hegesinas,  or  Homer,  but  what  he  and  others  say  of  Stasinus  only  adds 
new  doubts  to  those  which  already  beset  the  subject,  and  new  proofs  of 
the  uncertainties  of  the  ancients  themselves  respecting  it. 

VI.  Stasinus  was  said  to  have  been  the  son-in-law  of  Homer,  who,  ac 
cording  to  one  story,  composed  the  Cypria,  and  gave  it  to  Stasinus  as  his 
daughter's  marriage  portion  ;  manifestly  an  attempt  to  reconcile  the  two 
different  accounts,  which  ascribed  it  to  Homer  and  Stasinus.3    Consider 
ing  the  immense  range  of  mythological  stories  which  we  know  the  po 
em  to  have  embraced,  there  is  much  probability  in  the  opinion  of  Bern- 
hardy,  that  it  was  a  work  of  many  times  and  many  hands.     Its  title  also 
was  not,  as  we  are  told,  derived  from  the  native  island  of  Stasinus,  but 
may  be  explained  by  the  conspicuous  part  which  Venus  (Kvwpis)  has  in 
the  general  action. 

VII.  Proceeding  next  to  the  Cyclic  poems  which  continued  (he  Iliad,  we 
come  to  ARCTINUS  of  MILETUS,*  who  was  confessedly  a  very  ancient  poet , 
nay,  he  is  even  called  by  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus5  the  oldest  Grecian 
poet,  whence  some  writers  have  placed  him  even  before  the  time  of 
Homer ;  but  the  ancients  who  have  assigned  to  him  any  certain  date 
agree  in  placing  him  about  the  commencement  of  the  Olympiads.     He  is 


1  Athen.,  ii.,  p.  35,  c;  viii.,  p.  334  ;  xv.,  p.  682,  e. 

2  Prod.,  Chrestom.,  in  Gaisford's  Hephast.  tt  Prod.,  p.  471,  seqq. 

3  Prod.,  I.  c. ;  .Elian.,  V.  H.,  i.x.,  15. 

*  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  ;  Welcker,  vol.  i.,  p.  211,  scqq.        6  Ant-  Rom-,  i  .  OS,  seqq 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  59 

called  a  disciple  of  Homer ;  and,  from  all  we  know  about  him,  there  was 
scarcely  a  poet  in  his  time  who  deserved  this  title  more  than  Arctinus. 
He  was  the  most  distinguished  among  the  cyclic  poets.  There  were  in 
antiquity  two  epic  poems  belonging  to  the  cycle,  which  are  unanimously 
attributed  to  him,  namely,  the  JEthiopis  (A.iQtoTrls)  and  5IAiov  nepcris. 

VIII.  The  ^Ethiopia  was  in  five  books.     It  was  a  kind  of  continuation 
of  the  Iliad,  and  its  chief  heroes  were  Memnon,  son  of  Aurora,  king  of  the 
/Ethiopians,  and  Achilles,  who  slew  him.     The  substance  of  it  has  been 
preserved  by  Proclus.     The  'lAioy  7rep<n's,  or  Destruction  of  Ilium,  was  in 
twro  books,  and  contained  a  description  of  the  taking  and  destruction  of 
Troy,  and  the  subsequent  events,  until  the  departure  of  the  Greeks.    The 
substance  of  this  poem  has  also  been  given  by  Proclus.     A  third  epic 
poem,  called  TiTavopaxia,  that  is,  the  fight  of  the  gods  with  the  Titans,  and 
which  wras  probably  the  first  poem  in  the  epic  cycle,  was  ascribed  by 
some  to  Arctinus,  by  others  to  Eumelus  of  Corinth.1 

IX.  LESCHES,  or  LEscHEus2  (Ataxy*,  Aeolus),  was  a  native  of  Pyrrha, 
in  the  island  of  Lesbos,  and  in  the  neighborhood  of  Mytilene.3    Hence  he 
is  called  a  Mytilenean  or  Lesbian.    The  best  authorities  concur  in  placing 
him  in  the  time  of  Archilochus,  or  about  the  18th  Olympiad.     The  ac 
count,  therefore,  which  we  find  in  ancient  authors  of  a  contest  between 
Arctinus  and  Lesches,  can  only  mean  that  the  later  competed  with  the 
earlier  poet  in  treating  the  same  subjects,  and  not  that  they  were  con 
temporaries,  which  would  be  an  anachronism.    His  poem,  which  was  at 
tributed  by  many  to  Homer,  and,  besides,  to  various  other  authors,  was 
called  the  Little  Iliad  (yl\ias  77  eAao-trwj/,  or  'lAias  piKpa).     It  consisted  of 
four  books,  according  to  Proclus,  who  has  preserved  an  extract  from  it. 
It  was  evidently  intended  as  a  supplement  to  the  Homeric  Iliad  ;  conse 
quently,  it  related  the  events  after  the  death  of  Hector,  the  fate  of  Ajax. 
the  exploits  of  Philoctetes,  Neoptolemus,  and  Ulysses,  and  the  final  cap 
ture  and  destruction  of  Troy.*    The  connection  of  events  was  necessarily 
loose  and  superficial,  and  without  any  unity  of  subject.5 

X.  Between  the  poems  of  Arctinus,  and  Lesches,  and  the  Odyssey, 
came  the  epic  of  AGIAS, 6  the  Trcezenian,  divided  into  five  books,  and  en 
titled  Nostoi  (NoVroO-     His  poem  was  celebrated  in  antiquity,  and  gave 
the  history  of  the  return  (v6<rroi)  of  the  Grecians  from  Troy,  and  consisted 
of  five  books.    The  poem  began  with  the  cause  of  the  misfortunes  which 
befell  the  Greeks  on  their  way  home  and  after  their  arrival,  that  is,  with 
the  outrage  committed  upon  Cassandra  and  with  the  seizure  of  the  Palla 
dium.    Agias  wrote  about  B.C.  740.    Some  writers  attributed  the  NoV™ 
to  Homer.7    Similar  poems,  and  with  the  same  title,  were  written  by  oth 
er  poets  also.8    Wherever  the  NoVroi,  however,  is  mentioned  without  a 
name,  we  have  generally  to  understand  the  work  of  Agias.9 

XI.  The  continuation  of  the  Odyssey  was  the  Tclcgonia10  (Tr,\tyov to). 


Atken.,  i.,  p.  22  ;  vii.,  p.  277.      2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.         3  Pausan.,  x.,  25,  5. 
Arist.',  Poet.,  23,  ed.  Bekker.     5  Midler,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  06.      6  Smith,  Diet.  King.,  s.  v. 
Suid.,  s.  v.  I'do-Toi ;  Anthol.  Planud.,  iv.,  30. 
Schol.  ad  Pind.,  OL,  xiii.,  31  ;  At/ten.,  iv.,  p.  157;  ix.,  p.  4«t>. 

The  name  was  formerly  written  Augias,  through  a  mistake  ot  the  first  editor  of  l\u, 
cerpta  of  Proclus.  ">  mi'er,  Hist  Gr,  Lit.,  p.  70;   HY/cfor,  vol.  ii.,  p.  301.  *>M. 


60  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

It  consisted  of  two  books  or  rhapsodies,  and  formed  the  conclusion  of  the 
epic  cycle.  EUGAMON  (Evya/jiuv)  of  CYRENE,  who  did  not  live  before  the 
53d  Olympiad,  is  named  as  the  author.  It  contained  an  account  of  all  that 
happened  after  the  fight  of  Ulysses  with  the  suitors  of  Penelope,  until  the 
death  of  Ulysses.  The  substance  of  the  poem  is  preserved  by  Proclus. 
As  Eugamon  lived  at  so  late  a  period,  it  is  highly  probable  that  he  made 
use  of  the  productions  of  earlier  poets  ;  and  Clemens  of  Alexandrea  ex 
pressly  states  that  Eugamon  incorporated  in  his  Telegonia  a  whole  epic 
poem  of  Musaeus,  entitled  "  Thcsprotis."  The  name  Telegonia  was  formed 
from  Telegonus,  a  son  of  Ulysses  and  Circe,  who  killed  his  father. 

XII.  With  the  exception  of  the  events  of  the  Trojan  war,  and  the  re 
turn  of  the  Greeks,  nothing  was  so  closely  connected  with  the  Iliad  and 
Odyssey  as  the  war  of  the  Argives  against  Thebes ;  since  many  of  the  prin 
cipal  heroes  of  Greece,  particularly  Diomede  and  Sthenelus,  were  them 
selves  among  the  conquerors  of  Thebes,  and  their  fathers  before  them,  a 
bolder  and  wilder  race,  had  fought  on  the  same  spot,  in  a  contest  which, 
though  unattended  with  victory,  was  still  far  from  inglorious.  The  The- 
bdis,  which  consisted  of  seven  books,  or  5600  verses,  took  this  war  for  its 
subject,  and  originated  from  Argos.  The  Epigoni  ("Eiriyovoi)  was  so  far 
a  second  part  of  the  Thebais,  that  it  was  sometimes  comprehended  under 
the  same  name.  Its  subject  was  the  second  expedition  against  Thebes, 
in  which  the  Epigoni  proved  successful.1 


CHAPTER  XII. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 
HESIOD. 

I.  HESIOD  ('HerfoSos)3  was  one  of  the  earliest  Greek  poets,  and  we  possess 
respecting  his  personal  history  little  more  authentic  information  than  re 
specting  that  of  Homer,  together  with  whom  he  is  frequently  mentioned 
by  the  ancients.    The  names  of  these  two  poets,  in  fact,  form,  as  it  were, 
the  two  poles  of  the  early  epic  poetry  of  the  Greeks  ;  and  as  Homer  rep 
resents  the  poetry,  or  school  of  poetry,  belonging  chiefly  to  Ionia,  in  Asia 
Minor,  so  Hesiod  is  the  representative  of  a  school  of  bards,  which  was 
developed  somewhat  later  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Helicon,  in  Boeotia,  and 
spread  over  Phocis  and  Euboea. 

II.  The  only  points  of  resemblance  between  the  two  poets,  or  their  re 
spective  schools,  consist  in  their  forms  of  versification  and  in  their  dia 
lect,  but  in  all  other  respects  they  move  in  totally  different  spheres  ;  for 
the  Homeric  takes  for  its  subjects  the  restless  activity  of  the  Heroic  Age, 
while  the  Hesiodic  turns  its  attention  to  the  quiet  pursuits  of  ordinary 
life,  to  the  origin  of  the  world,  the  gods  and  heroes.     The  latter  thus  gives 
to  its  productions  an  ethical  and  religious  character  ;  and  this  circum 
stance  alone  suggests  an  advance  in  the  intellectual  state  of  the  ancient 
Greeks  upon  that  depicted  in  the  Homeric  poems ;  though  we  do  not 
mean  to  assert  that  the  elements  of  the  Hesiodic  poetry  are  of  a  later  date 

i  Milller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  71.  a  smith,  Diet.  Biigr.,  *.  v. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  61 

than  the  age  of  Homer,  for  they  may,  on  the  contrary,  be  as  ancient  as 
the  Greek  nation  itself. 

III.  But  we  must,  at  any  rate,  infer  that  the  Hesiodic  poetry,  such  as  it 
has  come  down  to  us,  is  of  later  growth  than  the  Homeric  ;  an  opinion 
which  is  confirmed  also  by  the  language  and  expressions  of  the  two 
schools,  and  by  a  variety  of  collateral  circumstances,  among  which  we 
may  mention  the  range  of  knowledge  being  much  more  extensive  in  the 
poems  which  bear  the  name  of  Hesiod  than  in  those  attributed  to  Ho 
mer.     Herodotus  and  others  regarded  Homer  and  Hesiod  as  contempo 
raries,  and  some  even  assigned  to  the  latter  an  earlier  date  than  the  for 
mer  ;J  but  the  general  opinion  of  the  ancients  was  that  Homer  was  the 
elder  of  the  two. 

IV.  Most  modern  critics  assume  that  Hesiod  lived  about  a  century  later 
than  Homer,  which  is  pretty  much  in  accordance  with  the  statement  of 
some  ancient  writers,  who  place  him  about  the  eleventh  Olympiad,  that 
is,  about  B.C.  735.     Respecting  the  life  of  the  poet  we  derive  some  infor 
mation  from  one  of  the  poems  ascribed  to  him,  namely,  the  *Epya  KOI  ^e- 
pai.    We  learn  from  that  poem2  that  he  was  born  in  the  village  of  Ascra, 
in  Bceotia,  whither  his  father  had  emigrated  from  the  ^Eolian  Cyma,  in 
Asia  Minor.     The  poet  describes  himself3  as  tending  a  flock  on  the  side 
of  Mount  Helicon,  and  from  this,  as  well  as  from  the  fact  of  his  calling 
himself  an  ari^rjTos,*  we  must  infer  that  he  belonged  to  an  humble  station, 
and  was  engaged  in  rural  pursuits.     But  subsequently  his  circumstances 
seem  to  have  been  bettered,  and  after  the  death  of  his  father  he  \vas  in 
volved  in  a  dispute  with  his  brother  Perses  about  his  small  patrimony, 
which  was  decided  in  favor  of  Perses.5 

V.  Hesiod  seems  after  this  to  have  migrated  to  Orchomenus,  where  he 
spent  the  remainder  of  his  life.6    At  Orchomenus  he  is  also  said  to  have 
been  buried,  and  his  tomb  was  shown  there  in  later  times.    What  we 
have  thus  far  stated  is  all  that  can  be  said  with  any  degree  of  certainty 
about  the  life  of  Hesiod.     Among  the  apocryphal  stories  related  of  the 
bard  is  one  respecting  a  poetical  contest  between  him  and  Homer,  which 
is  said  to  have  taken  place  at  Chalcis  during  the  funeral  solemnities  of 
King  Amphidamas,  or,  according  to  others,  at  Aulis  or  Delos.7     The  story 
of  this  contest  gave  rise  to  a  composition  still  extant  under  the  title  of 
>A7<i)j'  'O/jL-fjpov  Kal  'U(n6Sov,  the  work  of  a  grammarian  who  lived  toward 
the  end  of  the  first  century  of  our  era,  in  which  the  two  poets  are  repre 
sented  as  engaged  in  the  contest,  and  answering  each  other  in  their  verses. 
The  author  of  this  production  pretends  to  know  the  whole  family  history 
of  Hesiod,  and  traces  his  descent  from  Orpheus,  Linus,  and  Apollo  him 
self.     These  legends,  though  they  are  mere  fictions,  show  the  connection 
which  the  ancients  conceived  to  exist  between  the  poetry  of  Hesiod  (es 
pecially  the  Theogony)  and  the  ancient  schools  of  priests  and  bards,  which 
had  their  seats  in  Thrace  and  Pieria,  and  thence  spread  into  Bceotia,  where 


'  Gell.,  in.,  11  ;  xvii.,  21  ;  Suid.,  s.  v.  'H<7ioSo?.  2  v. 

3  Tkeog.,  23.  *  Op.  etDies,  636.  5  Id.,  219,  261,  637. 

6  Find.  ap.  Prod.,  yeros  'HerioSov,  p.  xliv.  ;  Hes.,  ed.  Gsttl. 

">  Produ,it  1.  c.,  p.  xliii  .  Flut,,  Con".  Sep.  Sap  ,  10. 


62  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

they  probably  formed  the  elements  out  of  which  the  Hesiodic  poetry  was 
developed. 

VI.  The  differences  between  the  Homeric  and  the  Hesiodic  schools  of 
poetry  are  plain  and  obvious,  and  were  recognized  in  ancient  times  no  less 
than  at  present,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  'Aykv  'o^pov  Kal  'Ho-^Sou.1    In 
their  mode  of  delivery  the  poets  of  the  two  schools  likewise  differed ;  for 
while  the  Homeric  poems  were  recited  under  the  accompaniment  of  the 
cithara,  those  of  Hesiod  were  recited  without  any  musical  instrument,  the 
reciter  holding  in  his  hand  only  a  branch  of  bay,  or  a  staff  (pdfiSos,  O-KTJTT- 
T/oov).2     Another  point  of  difference  between  the  Homeric  and  Hesiodic 
poetry  is  produced  by  certain  grammatical  forms  in  the  language  of  Hesiod, 
although  the  dialect  in  which  the  poems  of  both  schools  are  composed  is, 
on  the  whole,  the  same,  namely,  the  Ionic-epic,  which  had  become  estab 
lished  as  the  language  of  epic  poetry  through  the  influence  of  Homer. 

VII.  The  ancients  attributed  to  Hesiod  a  great  variety  of  works  ;  that 
is,  all  those  which  in  form  and  substance  answered  to  the  spirit  of  the 
Hesiodic  school,  and^  thus  seemed  to  be  of  a  common  origin.     We  shall 
subjoin  a  list  of  them,  beginning  with  those  which  are  still  extant. 

1 .  "Epya  KOI  'H.uepcu,  or  "Epya  simply,  commonly  called  Opera  et  Dies,  or 
"  Works  and  Days."  In  the  time  of  Pausanias,3  this  was  the  only  poem 
which  the  pe.ople  about  Mount  Helicon  considered  to  be  a  genuine  pro 
duction  of  Hesiod,  with  the  exception  of  the  first  ten  lines,  which  certain 
ly  appear  to  have  been  prefixed  by  a  later  hand.  There  are  also  several 
other  parts  of  this  poem  which  seem  to  be  later  interpolations  ;  but,  on 
the  whole,  it  bears  the  impress  of  a  genuine  production  of  very  high  an 
tiquity,  though  in  its  present  form  it  may  consist  only  of  disjointed  por 
tions  of  the  original.  It  is  written  in  the  most  homely  and  simple  style, 
with  scarcely  any  poetic  imagery  or  ornament,  and  must  be  looked  upon 
as  the  most  ancient  specimen  of  didactic  poetry.  It  contains  ethical,  po- 
/  litical,  and  economical  precepts,  the  last  of  which  constitute  the  greater 
part  of  the  work,  consisting  of  rules  about  choosing  a  wife,  the  education 
of  children,  agriculture,  commerce,  and  navigation. 

A  poem  on  these  subjects  was  not,  of  course,  held  in  much  esteem  by 
the  powerful  and  ruling  classes  in  Greece  at  the  time,  and  made  the  Spar 
tan  Cleomenes  contemptuously  call  Hesiod  the  poet  of  Helots,  in  contrast 
with  Homer,  the  delight  of  the  warrior.*  Afterward,  however,  when  the 
warlike  spirit  of  the  Heroic  Ages  subsided,  and  peaceful  pursuits  began 
to  be  held  in  higher  esteem,  the  poet  of  the  plough  rose  from  his  obscu- 
rity,  and  was  looked  upon  as  a  sage  ;  nay,  the  very  contrast  with  the  he 
roic  poetry  may  have  contributed  to  raise  his  fame,  except,  indeed,  with 
such  martial  spirits  as  Cleomenes.  At  all  events,  the  poem,  notwithstand 
ing  its  want  of  unity,  and  the  incoherence  of  its  parts,  gives  us  an  attract 
ive  picture  of  the  simplicity  of  the  early  Greek  mode  of  life,  of  their  man 
ners,  and  their  domestic  relations. 

The  conclusion  of  the  poem,  from  v.  750  to  828,  is  a  sort  of  calendar, 
and  was  probably  appended  to  it  in  later  times  ;  and  the  addition  Kal  r/^ut- 

1  p.  248,  ed.  Gt>tttin~?r.  2  Hesiod.,  Theog.,  30 ;  Pans.,  ix.,  30  ;  x.,  7,  2. 

3  Pau-s.,  ix.,  31,  3.  4  Pint.,  Apopktk.  Lac   Clcnn>.  .  \. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 


63 


pat,  in  the  title  of  the  poem,  seems  to  have  been  added  in  consequence  of 
this  appendage,  for  the  poem  is  sometimes  simply  called  "Epya.  It  would 
farther  seem  that  three  distinct  poems  have  been  inserted  in  it,  namely  : 
1.  The  fable  of  Prometheus  and  Pandora  (v.  47-105) ;  2.  On  the  Ages  of 
the  World,  which  are  designated  by  the  names  of  metals  (v.  109-201) ; 
and,  3.  A  Description  of  Winter  (v.  504-558).  The  first  two  of  these  poems 
are  not  so  much  out  of  keeping  with  the  whole  as  the  third,  which  is 
manifestly  the  most  recent  production  of  all,  and  most  foreign  to  the  spirit 
of  Hesiod.  That  which  remains,  after  the  deduction  of  these  probable  in 
terpolations,  consists  of  a  collection  of  maxims,  proverbs,  and  wise  say 
ings,  containing  a  considerable  amount  of  practical  wisdom ;  and  some 
of  these  ^vio^ai  or  fnroOriKai  may  be  as  old  as  the  Greek  nation  itself.1 

2.  0eo7oj/ia,  or  "  Theogony."  This  poem  was,  as  we  have  already  re 
marked,  not  considered  by  Hesiod's  countrymen  to  be  a  genuine  produc 
tion  of  the  poet's.  It  presents,  indeed,  great  differences  from  the  preced 
ing  one,  its  very  subject  being  apparently  foreign  to  the  homely  author 
of  the  "Ep7a.  The  Alexandrine  grammarians,  however,  especially  Zenod- 
otus  and  Aristarchus,  appear  to  have  had  no  doubt  about  its  genuineness,2 
though  their  opinion  can  not  be  taken  to  mean  any  thing  else  than  that 
the  poem  contained  nothing  that  was  opposed  to  the  character  of  the 
Hesiodic  school ;  and  thus  much  we  may  therefore  take  for  granted,  that 
the  "  Theogony"  is  not  the  production  of  the  same  poet  as  the  "Epya,  and 
that  it  probably  belongs  to  a  later  date. 

The  "  Theogony"  gives  an  account  of  the  origin  of  the  world  and  the 
birth  of  the  gods,  explaining  the  whole  order  of  nature  in  a  series  of 
genealogies,  for  every  part  of  physical  as  well  as  moral  nature  there  ap 
pears  personified  in  the  character  of  a  distinct  being.  The  whole  con 
cludes  with  an  account  of  some  of  the  most  illustrious  heroes,  whereby 
the  poem  enters  into  some  kind  of  connection  with  the  Homeric  epics. 
The  whole  poem  may  be  divided  into  three  parts:  1.  The  Cosmogony, 
which  widely  differs  from  the  simple  Homeric  notion,3  and  afterward 
served  as  the  ground-work  for  the  various  physical  speculations  of  the 
Greek  philosophers,  who  looked  upon  the  Theogony  of  Hesiod  as  contain 
ing  in  an  allegorical  form  all  the  physical  wisdom  that  they  were  able  to 
propound,  though  Hesiod  himself  was  believed  not  to  have  been  aware  of 
the  profound  philosophical  and  theological  wisdom  which  he  was  uttering. 
The  Cosmogony  extends  from  v.  116  to  452  ;  2.  The  Theogony,  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  word,  from  v.  453  to  962  ;  and,  3.  The  last  portion,  which 
is,  in  fact,  a  heroogony,  being  an  account  of  the  heroes  born  from  mortal 
mothers,  whose  charms  had  drawn  the  immortals  from  Olympus.  This 
part  is  very  brief,  extending  only  from  v.  963  to  1021,  and  forms  the 
transition  to  the  EKCE,  of  which  we  shall  speak  presently. 

If  we  ask  for  the  sources  from  which  the  author  of  the  Theogony  drew 
his  information  respecting  the  origin  of  the  world  and  the  gods,  the  an 
swer  can  not  be  much  more  than  a  conjecture,  for  there  is  no  direct  in 
formation  on  the  point.  Herodotus  asserts  that  Homer  and  Hesiod  made 

1  Isocr.  c.  Nicocl.,  p.  23,  cd.  Steph. ;  Lucian.,  Dial,  dc  Hes.,  i.,  8. 

a  Schol.  Venet.  wl,  II. ,  xviiir.  39.  3  II,  xiv.,  200. 


64  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

the  Theogony  of  the  Greeks ;  and,  in  reference  to  Hesiod  in  particular, 
this  probably  means  that  Hesiod  collected  and  combined  into  a  system  the 
various  local  legends,  especially  of  northern  Greece,  such  as  they  had 
been  handed  down  by  priests  and  bards.  The  assertion  of  Herodotus 
farther  obliges  us  to  take  into  consideration  the  fact  that,  in  the  earliest 
Greek  theology,  the  gods  do  not  appear  in  any  definite  forms,  whereas 
Hesiod  strives  to  anthropomorphize  all  of  them,  the  ancient  elementary 
gods,  as  well  as  the  later  dynasties  of  Saturn  and  Jove.  Now  both  the 
system  of  the  gods  and  the  forms  under  which  he  conceived  them  after 
ward  became  firmly  established  in  Greece,  and,  considered  in  this  way, 
the  assertion  of  Herodotus  is  perfectly  correct. 

Whether  the  form  in  which  the  Theogony  has  come  down  to  us  is  the 
original  and  genuine  one,  and  whether  it  is  complete  or  only  a  fragment, 
is  a  question  which  has  been  much  discussed  in  modern  times.  There 
can  be  little  doubt  but  that  in  the  course  of  time  the  poets  of  the  Hesiodic 
school  and  the  rhapsodists  introduced  various  interpolations,  which  pro 
duced  many  of  the  inequalities,  both  in  the  substance  and  form  of  the 
poem,  which  we  now  perceive ;  many  parts,  also,  may  have  been  lost. 
Hermann  has  endeavored  to  show  that  there  exist  no  less  than  seven  dif 
ferent  introductions  to  the  Theogony,  and  that,  consequently,  there  ex 
isted  as  many  different  recensions  and  editions  of  it.  But  as  our  present 
form  itself  belongs  to  a  very  early  date,  it  would  be  useless  to  attempt  to 
determine  what  part  of  it  formed  the  original  kernel,  and  what  is  to  be 
considered  as  later  addition  or  interpolation.1 

3.  'Ho?ai,  or  T/oTcu  pfydxcu,  also  called  Kardhoyoi  ywaiKwv.     The  name 
T)oiai  was  derived,  according  to  the  ancient  grammarians,  from  the  fact 
that  the  heroines,  who,  by  their  connection  with  the  immortal  gods,  had 
become  the  mothers  of  the  most  illustrious  heroes,  were  introduced  into 
the  poem  by  the  expression  3)  olrj,  "  or  such  as."    The  poem  itself,  which 
is  lost,  is  said  to  have  consisted  of  four  books,  the  last  of  which  was  by 
far  the  longest,  and  was  hence  called  rjomi  ^yaXai,  whereas  the  titles 
Kardhoyoi,  or  ijolai,  belonged  to  the  whole  body  of  poetry,  containing  ac 
counts  of  the  women  who  had  been  beloved  by  the  gods,  and  had  thus  be 
come  the  mothers  of  the  heroes  in  the  various  parts  of  Greece,  from  whom 
the  ruling  families  derived  their  origin.     The  work  thus  contained  the 
genealogies  or  pedigrees  of  the  most  illustrious  Greek  families.    Whether 
the  Eoeae  or  Catalogi  was  the  work  of  one  and  the  same  poet,  was  a  dis 
puted  point  among  the  ancients  themselves.2 

4.  'Affirls  'Hpa/c\eous,  or  "  Shield  of  Hercules,"  a  poem  on  the  combat  be 
tween  Hercules  and  Cycnus,  containing  a  description  of  the  hero's  shield. 
This  description  is  an  imitation  of  the  Homeric  account  of  the  shield  of 
Achilles,  but  is  done  with  much  less  skill  and  ability.    It  is  generally  sup 
posed  that  this  poem,  or  perhaps  fragment  of  a  poem,  originally  belonged 
to  the  Eceae. 

5.  Alyiptos,  an  epic  poem,  consisting  of  several  books  or  rhapsodies,  on 

1  Compare  Creuzer  und  Hermann,  Briefe  uber  Horn,  und  Hes.,  Heidelb.,  1817,  8vo , 
Sickler,  Cadmus,  &c.,  Hildburg.,  1818,  4to. 
J  £?&•?/.  ad  Apoll,  Rhod.,  ii  ,  181  ;  Schzt.  ad  Hes  ,  Thecg.,  142. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  65 

the  story  of  ^Egimius,  the  famous  ancestral  hero  of  the  Dorians,  and  the 
mythical  history  of  the  Dorians  in  general.  Some  of  the  ancients  at 
tributed  this  poem  to  Cercops  of  Miletus,1  A  few  fragments  alone  remain. 

6.  Mf\a/j.iro5ia,  an  epic  poem,  consisting  of  at  least  three  books,  and 
containing  the  stories  about  the  seer  Melampus.     It  was  thus  of  a  similar 
character  with  the  poems  which  celebrated  the  glory  of  the  heroic  fami 
lies  of  the  Greeks.     Some  of  the  ancients  denied  that  this  was  an  Hesi- 
odic  poem.2    Fragments  alone  have  reached  us. 

7.  'Etfynvis  tirl  repaffiv.    This  is  mentioned  as  an  Hesiodic  work  by 
Pausanias,3  and  is  distinguished  by  him  from  another  entitled  CTHJ  VLOLVTIKO.; 
but  it  is  not  improbable  that  both  were  identical  with,  or  portions  of,  an 
astronomical  work,  ascribed  to  Hesiod,  under  the  title  of  a.<rrptK^  &ip\os, 
or  aorpoXo-yfe.*    We  have  some  fragments  remaining. 

8.  Xeipwvos  inroQriKa.i.     This  seems  to  have  been  an  imitation  of  the 
"Epya.     A  few  fragments  remain. 

VIII.  The  poems  of  Hesiod,  especially  the  Theogony,  were  looked  up 
to  by  the  Greeks  from  very  early  times  as  great  authority  in  theological 
and  philosophical  matters,  and  philosophers  of  nearly  every  school  at 
tempted,  by  various  modes  of  interpretation,  to  bring  about  a  harmony 
between  the  statements  of  Hesiod  and  their  own  theories.     The  scholars 
of  Alexandrea  and  of  other  cities,  such  as  Zenodotus,  Aristophanes,  Aris- 
tarchus,  Crates  of  Malms,  Apollonius  Rhodius,  Seleueus  of  Alexandrea, 
Plutarch,  and  others,  devoted  themselves  with  great  zeal  to  the  criticism 
and  explanation  of  the  poems  of  Hesiod  ;  but  all  their  works  on  this  poet 
are  lost,  with  the  exception  of  some  isolated  remarks  contained  in  the 
scholia  on  Hesiod,  now  extant.     These  scholia  are  the  productions  of  a 
much  later  age,  though  their  authors  made  use  of  the  works  of  the  earlier 
grammarians.     The  scholia  of  the  Neo-Platonist  Proclus  (though  only  in 
an  abridged  form),  of  Joannes  Tzetzes,  and  Moschopulus,  on  the  "Epyct, 
and  introductions  on  the  life  of  Hesiod,  are  still  extant.     The  scholia  on 
the  Theogony  are  a  compilation  from  earlier  and  later  commentators. 
The  most  complete  edition  of  the  scholia  on  Hesiod  is  that  in  the  third 
volume  of  Gaisford's  Poctce  Greed  Minores. 

EDITIONS    OF    HESIOD.5 

IX.  The  Greek  text  of  the  Hesiodic  poems  was  first  printed  at  Milan  in  1493,  fol.,  to 
gether  with  Isocrates  and  some  of  the  idylls  of  Theocritus.    The  next  edition  is  that  in 
the  collection  of  gnomic  and  bucolic  poems,  published  by  Aldus  Manutius,  Venice,  1495. 
The  first  separate  edition  is  that  of  Junta,  Florence,  1515,  and  again  1540,  8vo.    The  first 
edition  that  contains  the  Greek  scholia  is  that  of  Trincavellus,  Venice,  1537,  4to,  and 
more  complete  at  Cologne,  1542,  8vo,  and  Frankfurt,  1591,  8vo.    The  most  important 
among  the  subsequent  editions  are  those  of  Dan.  Heinsius,  Amsterdam,  1667,  8vo,  with 
lectiones  Hesiodece  and  notes  by  Scaliger  and  Guietus :  it  was  reprinted  by  Leclerc  in 
1701,  8vo  ;  of  Th.  Robinson,  Oxford,  1737,  4to;  reprinted  at  Leipzig,  1746,  8vo  ;  of  Loes- 
ner,  Leipzig,  1778,  8vo,  containing  all  that  his  predecessors  had  accumulated,  together 
with  some  new  remarks ;  of  Gaisford,  in  the  first  volume  of  his  Poetoe  Greed  Minores, 
where  some  new  manuscripts  are  collated  ;  and  of  Gottling,  Gotha  and  Erfurt,  1831,  8vo 
(2d  ed.,  1843),  with  good  critical  and  explanatory  notes.    A  revision  of  the  text  by  Loers, 
with  Latin  version,  is  given  in  the  Bibl.  Graeca  of  Didot,  Paris,  1840.    The  "Epya.  were 

1  Apollod.,  ii.,  1,  3  ;  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  46.  2  Pans.,  ix.,  31,  4.  3  M.  i*> 

*  Athen.,  xi.,  p.  491  ;  Plut.,  De  Pyth.  Orac,.  18,      5  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 

edited  also  by  Brunck,  in  his  Poet*  Gnomici  and  other  collections.    The  Theozony  was 
edited  separately  by  F.  A.  Wolf,  Halle,  1783,  and  by  Van  Lennep,  Amsterdam,  1843,  8vo, 
i  a  very  useful  commentary.     There  are  also  two  good  editions  of  the  'Aoirts,  the  one 
bv  Ehhirteh.  BrP«i»,,    isno  cVO)  with  an  introductionj  scho]ia>  and  comment        . '      d    h 
g,  18-10,  8vo. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD-confmuerf. 
MISCELLANEOUS    EPIC    POETRY    OF    THIS    PERIOD.1 

I.  GREAT  as  was  the  number  of  poems  which  in  ancient  times  passed 
under  the  name  of  Homer,  and  were  connected  in  the  way  of  supplement 
or  continuation  with  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey,  and  also  of  those  which  were 
included  under  the  all-comprehensive  name  of  Hesiod,  yet  these  formed 
only  about  one  half  of  the  entire  epic  literature  of  the  early  Greeks.     Of 
the  others,  some  appear  to  have  aimed  at  a  certain  amount  of  Homeric 
unity  of  structure,  others  were  but  metrical  chronicles.     Their  authors 
appear,  for  the  most  part,  both  in  the  selection  of  their  mythical  subjects 
and  in  general  style  and  phraseology,  to  have  conformed  to  the  old  con 
ventional  standard  of  epic  mannerism. 

II.  Toward  the  close  of  this  period,  however,  efforts  are  observable 
on  the  part  of  Pisander,  Epimenides,  and  other  poetically  gifted  disciples 
of  the  popular  schools  of  religious  mysticism,  who  availed  themselves  of 
the  Epic  Muse  in  promulgating  their  doctrines,  to  enliven  the  prevailing 
monotony,  partly  by  the  introduction  of  new  materials,  partly  by  bolder 
methods  of  working  up  those  transmitted  by  their  predecessors.     Few  of 
these  works,  however,  enjoyed  any  great  celebrity  or  popularity  with  the 
later  Hellenic  public.     Several  had  perished  even  during  the  flourishing 
ages  of  Greek  literature,  or  were  no  longer  familiar  in  the  original  text  to 
the  authors  by  whom  they  were  cited  ;  and  with  the  exception  of  a  lim 
ited  stock  of  fragments,  the  whole  are  now  entirely  lost.     We  subjoin  a 
brief  account  of  the  principal  ones  among  these  writers. 

III.  1.  CiN^ETHON2  (Kij/at0o>z/),  of  Lacedcemon,  is  placed  by  Eusebius3  in 
B.C.  765.     He  was  the  author  of :   1.   Telegonia  (Tr]\cyovia),  which  gave 
the  history  of  Ulysses,  from  the  point  where  the  Odyssey  breaks  off  to  his 
death.*    2.  Genealogies,  which  are  frequently  referred  to  by  Pausanias,5 
and  which  must  consequently  have  been  extant  in  A.D.  175.     3.  Heradea 
('HpaKteia),  containing  an  account  of  the  adventures  of  Hercules.6   4.  (Edi- 
podia  (Ot'SjTToSi'a),  the  adventures  of  CEdipus  ;  ascribed  to  Cinsethon  in  an 
ancient  inscription,  but  other  authorities  speak  of  the  author  as  uncer 
tain.7     5.   The  Little  Iliad  ('I\iks  /j.iKpd),  attributed  by  some  to  Cineethon, 
though  more  correctly  by  others  to  Lesches,  whom  we  have  already  men 
tioned  among  the  Cyclic  poets. 

2.  EUMELUS  (EfyiijAos),  of  Corinth,  a  member  of  the  noble  house  of  the 

'  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  100 ;  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  445,  seq. 
2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Chron.,  Ol.  3,  4.  *  Euseb.,  I.  c. 

5  Pans.,  ii.,  3,  7 ;  ii.,  18,  5  ;  iv.,  2,  1,  &c.  6  Sckol  ad  Apolt.  Rhod.,  i.,  1357. 

7  Pans.,  ix.,  £,  5  ;  Schol.  ad  Eurip.,  Phcen..  1760. 


P  O  E  T  I  C  A  L     P  E  R  I O  D.  67 

Bacchiadee,  flourished  about  761-744  B.C.  Eusebius  makes  him  contem 
porary  with  Arctinus.  Those  of  the  poems  ascribed  to  him  which  appear 
pretty  certainly  genuine  were  genealogical  and  historical  legends.  To 
this  class  belonged  his  Corinthian  History  (~K.opivQia.Ka)  ;l  his  Europia  (Evpcb- 
Tria),  or  legend  of  Europa ;  and  his  TIpos65iov  es  A?)Aoj/,2  a  strain  which  he 
had  composed  for  the  Messenians,  for  a  sacred  mission  to  the  temple  of 
Delos.  He  also  wrote  Bougonia  (Bovyovia),  a  poem  on  bees,  which  the 
Greeks  called  &ovy6vai  and  /Souyej/eTs.3  Some  writers  ascribed  to  him  a 
Tiravofj-axio-,  which  was  also  attributed  to  Arctinus.  The  Cyclic  poem 
on  the  return  of  the  Greeks  from  Troy  is  ascribed  to  Eumelus  by  a  scho 
liast  on  Pindar,  who  writes  the  name  wrongly,  Eumolpus. 

3.  ANTIMACHUS  (5Ai/Tt>axos),  of  Teos,  an  epic  poet  of  great  antiquity, 
but  of  little  celebrity.     Plutarch*  cites  him  as  having  mentioned,  contem 
poraneously  it  must  be  understood,  the  eclipse  which  happened  on  the  20th 
of  April,  in  the  third  year  of  the  sixth  Olympiad,  B.C.  753,  the  date  assign 
ed  to  the  foundation  of  Rome.     The  title  of  no  work  by  this  poet  has  been 
preserved,  and  but  a  single  verse  is  quoted,  in  condemnation  of  bribery. 

4.  Asius  ('Acnos),  of  Samos,5  ranks  among  the  more  ancient  epic  poets 
of  the  genealogical  order,  but  no  specific  date  is  connected  with  his  name, 
nor  are  his  works  mentioned  under  any  other  titles  than  the  general  one 
of  genealogies.     He  lived  in  all  probability  about  B.C.  700.     He  seems 
to  have  treated  a  variety  of  subjects,  as  episodes,  it  may  be  presumed, 
illustrative  of  local  and  family  history.     The  longest  extant  passage  gives 
a  glowing  and  vivid  description  of  the  brilliant  appearance  of  the  Samian 
ladies  advancing  in  procession  to  the  temple  of  Juno,  and  is  distinguished 
by  a  festive  pomp  of  diction  in  good  keeping  with  the  subject.6 

5.  PISANDER  (Ufia-avSpos},  of  Camirus,  in  Rhodes,  is  the  most  celebra 
ted  epic  poet  of  this  period  next  to  Homer  and  Hesiod,  and  he  ranks, 
accordingly,  next  to  them  in  the  epic  canon  of  Alexandrea.     He  appears 
to  have  nourished  about  B.C.  648-645.     Pisander  was  the  author  of  a 
poem  in  two  books  on  the  exploits  of  Hercules.     It  was  called  Heraclea 
('HpcucAeja),  and  Clement  of  Alexandrea7  accuses  him  of  having  taken  it 
entirely  from  one  Pisinus  of  Lindus.     In  this  poem,  Hercules  was  for 
the  first  time  represented  as  armed  with  a  club,  and  covered  with  the 
lion's  skin,  instead  of  the  usual  armor  of  the  heroic  period  ;  and  it  is  not 
improbable,  as  Muller  suggests,  that  Pisander  was  also  the  first  that  fixed 
the  number  of  the  hero's  labors  at  twelve.8     Only  a  few  lines  of  this 
poem  have  been  preserved ;  two  are  given  us  by  the  scholiast  on  Aris 
tophanes,9  and  another  by  Stobaeus.10     Other  poems  which  were  ascribed 
to  Pisander  were,  as  we  learn  from  Suidas,  spurious,  having  been  com 
posed  chiefly  by  Aristeas.     Pisander  of  Camirus  must  not  be  confounded 
with  Pisander  of  Laranda,  who  flourished  in  the  reign  of  Alexander  Se- 
verus,  A.D.  222-235. n 


1  Paus.,  ii.,  1,1;  ii.,  3,  8  ;  Schol.  ad  Apoll.  Rhod.,  i.,  148.      2  Pans.,  iv.,  4,  1 ;  v.,  19,  2. 
3  Varro,  R.  R.,  ii.,  5,  5,  ed.  Schneid.  4  Vit.  Rom.,  12.  a  Athcn.,  iii.,  p.  125. 

6  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  102.  1  Strom.,  vi.,  p.  26G,  ed.  Sylburg. 

8  Strab.,  xv.,  p.  688;  Suid.,  s.  v.  ITeiW-Spoc.  9  .\ub.,  1034. 

10  FloriL,  xii.,  6.  u  Smith.  Dirt.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


68  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


6.  EriMENiDEs1  ('EiriufvlSris)  was  a  poet  and  prophet  of  Crete,  whose  bi 
ography2  is  partly  connected  with  the  realities  of  history,  and  partly  en 
veloped  in  the  mists  of  fable.     Numerous  works,  both  in  prose  and  verse, 
were  attributed  to  him,  though  few,  if  any,  can  be  considered  to  have 
been  genuine  productions  of  Epimenides  ;  the  age  in  which  he  lived  was 
certainly  not  an  age  of  prose  composition  in  Greece.     All  that  tradition 
has  handed  down  about  him  suggests  that  we  ought  to  rank  him  in  the 
class  of  priestly  bards  and  sages,  who  are  generally  comprised  under  the 
name  of  Orphici  ;  for  every  thing  we  hear  of  him  is  of  a  priestly  or  relig 
ious  nature  :  he  was  a  purifying  priest,  of  superhuman  knowledge  and 
wisdom,  a  seer  and  a  prophet,  and  acquainted  also  with  the  healing  pow 
ers  of  plants.     These  notions  about  Epimenides  were  propagated  through 
out  antiquity,  and  it  was  probably  owing  to  the  great  charm  attached  to 
his  name  that  so  many  works  were  ascribed  to  him.     Diogenes  Laertius3 
notices  as  prose  works  of  his,  one  on  sacrifices,  and  another  on  the  po 
litical  constitution  of  Crete.     Among  his  poetic  productions  were  Xpricr- 
juot,  "  Oracles,"  and  Kaflap^o/,4  "Hymns  of  Purification."     It  is,  however, 
very  doubtful  whether  he  wrote  the  TeVecns  and  ©eoyovta  of  the  Curetes 
and  Corybantes  in  5000  verses,  the  epic  on  Jason  and  the  Argonauts  in 
6500,  and  the  epic  on  Minos  and  Rhadamanthys  in  4000  verses  ;  all  of 
which  works  are  mentioned  by  Diogenes.     There  can  not,  however,  be 
any  doubt  but  that  there  existed  in  antiquity  certain  old-fashioned  poems 
written  upon  skins  ;  and  the  expression  'ETn^uiSeiov  Heppa  was  used  by 
the  ancients  to  designate  any  thing  old-fashioned,  obsolete,  and  curious. 
An  allusion  to  Epimenides  seems  to  be  made  in  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  Titus.* 

7.  ARISTEAS  ('Apia-Teas),  of  Proconnesus,  appears  to  belong  to  the  same 
mysterious  class  with  Epimenides,  and  his  age,  in  so  far  as  a  real  person 
ality  can  be  assigned  him,  nearly  coincides  with  that  of  the  latter.     The 
accounts  of  his  life  are  full  of  fable.     Herodotus  calls  him  the  inspired 
bard  of  Apollo  (<£ot/3o'A.a/A7n-os).     He  is  said  to  have  travelled  through  the 
countries  north  and  east  of  the  Euxine,  and  to  have  visited  the  Issedones, 
Arimaspae,  Cimmerii,  Hyperborei,  and  other  mythic  nations,  and  on  his 
return  to  have  written  an  epic  poem  in  three  books,  called  TO.  'Api/j.d<nreia, 
in  which  he  seems  to  have  described  all  that  he  had  seen  or  pretended 
to  have  seen.     This  work  appears  to  have  been  full  of  marvellous  stories, 
but  was  nevertheless  looked  upon  as  a  source  of  historical  and  geograph 
ical  information.     Still  it  was  an  epic  poem,  and  is  frequently  mentioned 
by  the  ancients  ;  but  it  fell  into  oblivion  at  an  early  period.     Thirteen 
hexameter  verses  from  it  are  preserved  by  Longinus. 

EDITIONS.  —  The  most  complete  collection  of  the  fragments  of  the  minor  Epic  poets  is  by 
Dlintzer,  Die  Fragments  der  epischen  Poesie  der  Griechen  bis  zur  Zeit  Alexander's  des  Gros- 
sen,  Koln,  1840  ;  and  Nachtrag,  &c.,  Ib.,  1841  :  others  are  given  by  Diibner  in  the  edition 
of  Hesiod  and  the  minor  Epic  poets  in  Didot's  Bibl.  Graeca  ;  and  by  Marckscheflfel  in  his 
collection  of  the  fragments  of  Hesiod,  Eumelus,  Cinaethon,  &c.,  Leipzig,  1840. 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  v.  *  Diog.  Laert.,  i.,  10  ;  i.,  109  ;  Pint.,  Vit.  Sol.,  12. 

3  Diog.  Laert.,  i.,  112.  *  Suid.,  s.  v.  'Eiri/wi/iSijs.  5  Chap,  i.,  v.  12. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 
SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 

LYRIC    POETRY. 
INTRODUCTORY    REMARKS.1 

I.  ACCORDING  to  the  subdivision  that  has  been  laid  down  by  us,  Lyric 
composition  is  considered  to  comprise  every  poetical  work  not  embodied 
in  hexameter  verse,  and,  consequently,  the  whole  elegiac  and  iambic,  in 
addition  to  the  melic  and  choral  poetry  of  this  period. 

II.  Until  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century  before  our  era,  or  the 
20th  Olympiad,  the  epic  was  the  only  kind  of  poetry  in  Greece,  and  the 
hexameter  the  only  kind  of  metre  which  had  been  cultivated  by  the  poets 
with  art  and  diligence.     Doubtless  there  were,  especially  in  connection 
with  different  worships,  strains  of  other  kinds,  and  measures  of  a  lighter 
movement,  according  to  which  dances  of  a  sprightly  character  could  be 
executed ;  but  these  as  yet  did  not  form  a  finished  style  of  poetry,  and 
were  only  rude  essays  and  undeveloped  germs  of  other  varieties,  which 
hitherto  had  only  a  local  interest,  confined  to  the  rites  and  customs  of 
particular  districts. 

III.  In  all  musical  and  poetical  contests,  the  solemn  and  majestic  tone 
of  the  epopee  and  the  epic  hymn  alone  prevailed ;  and  the  soothing  pla 
cidity  which  these  lays  imparted  to  the  mind  was  the  only  feeling  which 
had  found  its  satisfactory  poetical  expression.    As  yet  the  heart,  agitated 
by  joy  and  grief,  by  love  and  anger,  could  not  give  utterance  to  its  lament 
for  the  lost,  its  longing  after  the  absent,  its  care  for  the  present,  in  appro 
priate  forms  of  poetical  composition.     These  feelings  were  still  without 
the  elevation  which  the  beauty  of  art  can  alone  confer.     The  epopee  kept 
the  mind  fixed  in  the  contemplation  of  a  former  generation  of  heroes, 
which  it  could  view  with  sympathy  and  interest,  but  not  with  passionate 
emotion.    And  although,  in  the  economical  poem  of  Hesiod,  the  cares  and 
sufferings  of  the  present  time  furnished  the  occasion  for  an  epic  work, 
yet  this  was  only  a  partial  descent  from  the  lofty  career  of  epic  poetry ; 
for  it  immediately  rose  again  from  this  lowly  region,  and  celebrated  in 
solemn  strains  the  order  of  the  universe. 

IV.  This  exclusive  prevalence  of  epic  poetry  was  also  doubtless  con 
nected  with  the  political  state  of  Greece  at  the  time.     The  ordinary  sub 
jects  of  the  epic  poems  must,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  have  been 
peculiarly  acceptable  to  the  princes  who  derived  their  race  from  the  he 
roes  of  the  mythical  age,  as  was  the  case  with  all  the  royal  families  of 
early  times.     This  rule  of  hereditary  princes  was  the  prevailing  form  of 
government  in  Greece,  at  least  up  to  the  beginning  of  the  Olympiads,  and 
from  this  period  it  gradually  disappeared  ;  at  an  earlier  date  and  by  more 
violent  revolutions  among  the  lonians,  than  among  the  nations  of  Pelo 
ponnesus. 

1  MiiHer,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  104. 


70  G  R  E  K  K    L  1  T  E  R  A  T  U  U  E . 

V.  The  republican  movements,  by  which  the  princely  families  were  de 
prived  of  their  privileges,  could  not  be  otherwise  than  favorable  to  a  free 
expression  of  the  feelings,  and,  in  general,  to  a  stronger  development  of 
each  man's  individuality.     Hence  the  poet,  who,  in  the  most  perfect  form 
of  the  epos,  was  completely  lost  in  his  subject,  and  was  only  the  mirror 
in  which  the  grand  and  brilliant  images  of  the  past  were  reflected,  now 
comes  before  the  people  as  a  man  with  thoughts  and  objects  of  his  own  ; 
and  gives  free  vent  to  the  struggling  emotions  of  his  soul  in  elegiac  and 
iambic  strains.     As  the  elegy  and  the  iambic,  those  two  contemporary  and 
cognate  species  of  poetry,  originated  with  Ionic  poets,  and  (as  far  as  we 
are  aware)  with  citizens  of  free  states,  so  again  the  remains  and  accounts 
of  these  styles  of  poetry  furnish  the  best  image  of  the  internal  condition 
of  the  Ionic  states  of  Asia  Minor  and  the  Islands,  in  the  first  period  of 
their  republican  constitution.1 

I.     ELEGIAC     VERSE.2 

VI.  We  may  safely  assume,  by  reference  both  to  the  general  law  of 
human  invention,  and  to  the  discriminating  taste  which  marks  the  devel 
opment  of  art  among  the  Greeks,  that  the  elegiac  distich,  namely,  an  hex 
ameter  followed  by  a  pentameter,  was  called  into  existence  by  the  object 
to  which  it  was  best  adapted,  that  of  modifying  the  old  dactylic  metre  to 
familiar  epigrammatic  purposes ;  for  the  obvious  effect  of  this  combina 
tion  of  the  longer  and  shorter  measures,  enhanced  by  a  peculiar  abrupt 
ness  in  the  central  caesura  of  the  latter,  and  in  its  closing  foot,  or  cata- 
lexis,  is  to  impart  a  certain  emphatic  point  to  the  entire  period. 

VII.  The  Elegy  or  elegiac  poem  (tVuyej'a)  is  but  a  repetition  of  the  dis 
tich  in  numbers  proportioned  to  the  extent  of  the  subject ;  and  the  scope 
and  tendency  of  this  branch  of  composition  is  to  express  concisely  and 
emphatically,  in  the  case  of  the  single  distich,  a  certain  statement  or 
maxim  ;  in  that  of  the  prolonged  elegy,  a  series  of  similar  statements  or 
maxims. 

VIII.  Each  pentameter  couplet  ought  obviously,  in  the  true  spirit  of  the 
Elegiac  Muse,  either  itself  to  comprise  a  distinct  clause  or  period  of  the 
sense,  or  at  least  to  form  a  subdivision  of  another  more  comprehensive 
clause^or  head  of  argument,  terminating  in  a  pentameter  verse  ;  in  other 
words,  every  full  pause  in  the  sense  ought  to  coincide  with  a  full  pause 
in  the  measure.     Where  a  continuous  head  of  the  subject  runs  through 
the  close  of  one  distich  into  the  commencement  of  another,  there  results 
a  palpable  incongruity,  which  becomes  the  more  glaring  when  the  ensu 
ing  pause  takes  place  in  the  body  of  the  distich,  whether  at  the  close  of 
the  hexameter  or  in  the  middle  of  either  verse.     Not  only,  therefore,  is 
the  elegy  disqualified  by  its  epigrammatic  spirit  for  continuous  narrative, 
but  even  in  its  own  proper  sphere  comparative  brevity  is  essential  to  the 
full  effect  of  an  elegiac  poem.     However  carefully,  therefore,  this  real  im 
propriety  may  be  smoothed  over  by  the  ingenuity  of  the  poet,  the  discern 
ing  critic  must,  in  his  own  experience,  have  felt  how  much  superior  is  the 
effect  of  the  elegiac  measure  in  the  pointed  epigram,  and  other  concise 

1  Mi/Her,  L  c.  2  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  iii..  p.  16,  serjq.  ;  Milller,  1.  c. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 


and  pithy  compositions,  than  in  prolonge.d  poetical  narratives  or  moral 
dissertations.1 

IX.  The  word  tteye?ov,  as  used  by  the  best  writers,  like  the  word  &ros, 
refers  not  to  the  subject  of  a  poem,  but  simply  to  its  form,  and  in  this  sense, 
therefore,  means  nothing  more  than  the  combination  of  an  hexameter  and 
a  pentameter,  making  together  a  distich  ;  and  an  elegeia  (e'Aeyefa)  is  a 
poem  made  up  of  such  distichs.  The  word  e'AeyelW,  however,  is  itself 
only  a  derivative  from  a  simpler  word,  namely,  tfAe7os.  This  parent  term 
e'Ae-yos,  as  we  learn  from  the  united  testimony  of  the  ancient  critics,  al 
though  its  own  etymology  is  quite,  uncertain,  denoted,  in  its  earliest  usage, 
what  had  reference  to  mourning  or  sorrow.  It  means,  properly,  a  strain 
of  lament,  without  any  determinate  reference  to  a  metrical  form  ;  thus, 
for  example,  in  Aristophanes,  the  nightingale  sings  an  elcgos  for  her  lost 
Itys  ;  and  in  Euripides,  the  halcyon,  or  kingfisher,  sings  an  elegos  for  her 
husband  Ceyx  ;  in  both  which  passages  the  word  has  this  general  sense.2 
To  this  view,  however,  it  has  been  objected  that  the  extant  elegiac 
compositions  of  remote  antiquity  are  for  the  most  part  in  a  style  quite  op 
posite  to  either  the  funebrial  or  the  epigrammatic,  being  chiefly  martial  or 
patriotic  appeals,  often  of  considerable  length,  addressed  to  the  poet's  fel- 
bw-citizens  in  times  of  public  emergency.  These  poems,  however,  while 
possibly  the  oldest  ascertained  specimens  of  pentameter  style,  can  not 
reasonably  be  assumed  to  represent  the  taste  or  practice  in  which  that 
style  originated.  The  distinction  between  what  may  formerly  have  ex 
isted  and  what  has  been  preserved  to  posterity,  is  one  of  essential  im 
portance  in  questions  of  this  nature.  The  elegy  in  the  works  of  Callinus, 
Archilochus,  and  Tyrtaeus,  its  earliest  professional  votaries,  already  ap 
pears  in  an  advanced  state  of  cultivation,  implying  a  long  course  of  pre 
vious  practice,  and  consequent  modification  of  its  primitive  use.  Their 
compositions  stand  to  its  first  beginnings  in  the  same  relation  as  the  Iliad 
and  Odyssey  to  the  earlier  efforts  of  the  Epic  Muse.3 

XI.  It  were  as  reasonable  to  argue  from  the  actual  priority  of  the  Iliad 
that  the  first  poem  in  hexameter  verse  was  a  finished  epopee,  as  from  the 
existing  compositions  of  Callinus,  admitting  him  to  be  the  most  ancient 
author  in  this  style,  that  the  first  elegy  was  a  martial  or  political  ode. 
For  the  great  antiquity  of  the  elegy,  however,  in  its  application  to  what  has 
here  been  assumed  to  be  its  original  object,  appeal  may  be  made  to  Archil 
ochus,  an  author  of  the  same  age  as  Callinus,  but  of  far  more  varied 
genius.    The  remains  of  Archilochus,  while  exhibiting  the  measure  in  its 
adaptation  to  every  variety  of  subject,  plaintive,  martial,  and  satirical 
oner,  together  with  several  elegies  of  a  funebrial  character,  a  general  pre 
dominance  of  those  of  the  epigrammatic  order. 

XII.  But,  even  did  the  works  of  these  earlier  poets  furnish  no  distinct 
proof  of  this  presumed  original  destination  of  the  measure,  there  remains 
another  more  competent  source  of  illustration  in  the  sepulchral  or  votive 
dedications  of  the  same  era.   The  existing  relics  of  this  class,  though  scan 
ty  in  the  ratio  of  their  antiquity,  yet  form  a  more  or  less  continuous  series 
ofewdencMhaVd^  from  an  epoch  equal  or  lit- 

1  Mure>  L  c-  '  Duller.  I.e.,  ~     s  M  " 


/ 2  G  R  E  E  K     L  IT  E  R  A  T  U  R  E. 

tie  inferior  to  that  of  the  poets  above  cited,  the  pentameter  was  the  meas 
ure  exclusively  preferred  in  monumental  inscriptions.1  We  will  now  pro 
ceed  to  give  a  brief  account  of  the  most  eminent  elegiac  writers. 

1.  GALLIOTS*  (Kai\A?j/os),  of  Ephesus,  ranks  among  the  earliest  elegiac 
poets  of  whose  compositions  any  portions  are  still  extant.     As  regards 
the  time  in  which  he  lived,  we  have  no  definite  statement,  and  the  an 
cients  themselves  endeavored  to  determine  it  from  the  historical  allusions 
which  they  found  in  his  elegies.    From  Strabo,3  it  is  evident  that  Callinus, 
in  one  of  his  poems,  mentioned  Magnesia,  on  the  Mseander,  as  still  exist 
ing,  and  at  war  with  the  Ephesians.     Now  we  know  that  Magnesia  was 
destroyed  by  the  Treres,  a  Cimmerian  tribe,  in  B.C.  727,  and,  consequent 
ly,  the  poem  referred  to  by  Strabo  must  have  been  written  previous  to 
that  year,  perhaps  about  B.C.  730,  or  shortly  before  Archilochus,  who,  in 
one  of  his  earliest  poems,  mentioned  the  destruction  of  Magnesia.     Cal 
linus  himself,  however,  appears  to  have  long  survived  that  event ;  for 
there  is  a  line  of  his*  which  is  usually  referred  to  the  destruction  of  Sardis 
by  the  Cimmerians  about  B.C.  678.     If  this  calculation  be  correct,  Calli 
nus  must  have  been  in  the  bloom  of  life  at  the  time  of  the  war  between 
Magnesia  and  Ephesus,  in  which  he  himself,  perhaps,  took  a  part.   We  pos 
sess  only  a  very  few  fragments  of  the  elegies  of  Callinus,  but  among  them 
there  is  one  of  twenty-one  lines,  which  forms  part  of  a  war-elegy,  and  is, 
consequently,  the  most  ancient  specimen  of  this  species  of  poetry  extant.5 
In  this  fragment  the  poet  exhorts  his  countrymen  to  courage  and  perse 
verance  against  their  enemies,  who  are  usually  supposed  to  be  the  Mag- 
nesians,  but  the  fourth  line  of  the  poem  seems  to  render  it  more  probable 
that  Callinus  was  speaking  of  the  Cimmerians.    This  elegy  is  one  of  great 
beauty,  and  gives  us  the  highest  opinion  of  the  talent  of  Callinus.     It  is 
printed  in  the  various  collections  of  the  "  Poetae  Graeci  Minores."    All  the 
fragments  of  Callinus  are  collected  in  Bach's  Callini,  Tyrtai,  et  Asii  Frag- 
menta,  Leipzig,  1831, 8vo,  and  Bergk's  Poeta  Lyrici  Graci,  p.  303,  seqq. 

2.  TYRT^Eus6  (Tvprcuos  or  TV/JTCUOS),  contemporary  with  Callinus,  and 
probably  a  few  years  younger.     His  age  is  determined  by  the  second 
Messenian  war,  in  which  he  bore  a  part.     According  to  the  older  tradition, 
the  Spartans,  during  the  second  Messenian  war,  were  commanded  by  an 
oracle  to  take  a  leader  from  among  the  Athenians,  and  thus  to  conquer 
their  enemies,  whereupon  they  chose  Tyrtaeus  as  their  leader.7    Later 
writers,8  however,  embellish  the  story,  and  represent  Tyrtaeus  as  a  lame 
schoolmaster,  of  low  family  and  reputation,  whom  the  Athenians,  when 
applied  to  by  the  Lacedaemonians,  in  accordance  with  the  oracle,  purpose 
ly  sent  as  the  most  inefficient  leader  they  could  select,  being  unwilling  to 
assist  the  Lacedaemonians  in  extending  their  dominion  in  the  Pelopon 
nesus,  and  but  little  thinking  that  the  poetry  of  Tyrtaeus  would  achieve 
that  victory  which  his  physical  constitution  seemed  to  forbid  his  aspiring 
to.    Many  modern  critics  reject  altogether  the  account  of  the  Attic  origin 

1  Mure,  I.  c.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  647. 

4  Fragm.  2.    Compare  fragm.  8,  ed.  Bergk.  5  Stob&us,  Floril.,  li.,  19. 

6  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  7  Lycurff.  c.  Leocr.,  p.  211,  ed.  Reiske. 

8  Pans.,  iv.,  15,  3;  Justin.,  iii.,  5,  &c. 


P  O  E  T  I  C  A  L     P  E  R  I  O  D.  73 

of  Tyrtseus,  and  maintain  that  the  extant  fragments  of  his  poetry  actually 
furnish  evidence  of  his  being  a  Lacedaemonian.  But  it  is  impossible  to 
arrive  at  any  positive  decision  on  the  subject.  Most  probably,  however, 
he  was  a  native  of  the  Athenian  town  of  Aphidnse,  which  is  placed  by  the 
legends  about  the  Dioscuri  in  very  early  connection  with  Laconia.  The 
statement  that  he  was  a  lame  schoolmaster  is  rejected  by  all  modern 
writers.  It  may  simply  mean  that  he  was,  like  the  other  early  musi 
cians  and  poets,  a  teacher  of  his  own  art ;  and  his  alleged  lameness  may 
possibly  be  connected  with  some  misunderstanding  of  expressions  used 
by  the  earlier  writers  to  describe  his  metres,  namely,  the  pentameter  in 
conjunction  with  the  hexameter,  compared  with  which  the  former  is  short 
of  a  foot. 

The  poems  of  Tyrtaeus  exercised  an  important  influence  upon  the  Spar 
tans,  allaying  their  dissensions  at  home,  and  animating  their  courage 
in  the  field.  In  order  to  appease  their  civil  discords,  he  composed  his 
celebrated  elegy,  entitled  Ewo/^'o,  "  Legal  Order,"1  which  appears  to  have 
had  a  wondrous  effect  in  stilling  the  excited  passions  of  the  Spartans. 
But  still  more  celebrated  wrere  the  poems  by  which  he  animated  the  cour 
age  of  the  Spartans  in  their  conflict  with  the  Messenians.  These  poems 
were  of  two  kinds  ;  namely,  elegies,  containing  exhortations  to  constancy 
and  courage,  and  descriptions  of  the  glory  of  fighting  bravely  for  one's 
native  land ;  and  more  spirited  compositions  in  the  anapaestic  measure, 
which  were  intended  as  marching  songs,  to  be  performed  with  the  music 
of  the  flute.  He  lived  to  see  the  success  of  his  efforts  in  the  entire  con 
quest  of  the  Messenians,  and  their  reduction  to  the  condition  of  Helots.2 
He  therefore  flourished  down  to  B.C.  668,  which  was  the  last  year  of  the 
second  Messenian  war. 

The  extant  fragments  of  Tyrtaeus  are  contained  in  most  of  the  older 
and  more  recent  collections  of  the  Greek  poets,  and,  among  the  rest,  in 
Gaisford's  Poeta  Minores  Graci,  Schneidewin's  Delectus  Poesis  Grcecorum, 
and  Bergk's  Pocta  Lyrici  Gr&ci.  The  best  separate  editions  are  those  of 
Klotz,  Bremae,  1764,  8vo ;  of  Francke,  in  his  edition  of  Callinus,  1816, 
8vo  ;  of  Didot,  with  an  elegant  French  translation,  a  Dissertation  on  the 
poet's  life,  and  a  modern  Greek  version  by  Clonaras,  Paris,  1826,  8vo  ; 
and  of  Bach,  with  the  remains  of  the  elegiac  poets  Callinus  and  Asius, 
Lips.,  1831,  8vo. 

3.  ARCHILOCHUS  ('Apx'i^oxos}.  The  biography  of  this  poet  belongs  prop 
erly  to  the  head  of  Iambic  poetry,  since  it  was  on  his  satiric  iambic  poetry 
that  his  fame  was  founded.  This  union  of  elegiac  and  iambic  poetry,  how 
ever,  in  the  same  person,  often  appears  after  this.  The  same  poet  who 
employs  the  elegy  to  express  his  joyous  and  melancholy  emotions,  had  re 
course  to  the  iambus,  where  his  cool  sense  prompts  him  to  censure  the 
follies  of  mankind.  The  elegies  of  Archilochus,  of  which  considerable 
fragments  are  extant,  had  nothing  of  that  bitter  spirit  of  which  his  iam 
bics  were  full,  but  they  contain  the  frank  expression  of  a  mind  powerfully 
affected  by  outward  circumstances.  Nor  are  they  quite  wanting  in  the 
warlike  spirit  of  Callinus,  although  he  was  not  ashamed  to  avow  in  verse 

i  Aristot.,  Polit.,  v..  7,  1  ;  Pans.,  iv.,  8,  2.  2  Pans.,  iv.,  14,  3. 

D 


74  S  REEK     LITERATURE. 

that  he  had  on  one  occasion  incurred  the  disgrace  of  having  lost  his  shield 
in  an  engagement  with  the  Thracian  foe.1 

4.  SIMONIDES  (2i;u«j/i57js),  of  Amorgus,  like  Archilochus,  properly  belongs 
to  the  iambic  school  of  poetry,  and  will  be  more  fully  noticed  under  that 
head.    He  composed  an  elegy  in  two  books,  which  appears,  from  all  that  we 
can  ascertain  respecting  it,  to  have  been  akin  to  the  Eunomia  of  Tyrtaeus. 

5.  MIMNERMUS  (Mi/ii/ep/ios),2  a  celebrated  elegiac  poet,  generally  called 
a  Colophonian,3  but,  from  a  fragment  of  his  poem  entitled  Nanno,  it  ap 
pears  that  he  was  descended  from  those  Colophonians  who  reconquered 
Smyrna  from  the  ^Eolians,4  and  that,  strictly  speaking,  Smyrna  was  his 
birth-place.     Mimnermus  nourished  from  about  B.C.  634  to  the  age  of  the 
seven  sages  (about  B.C.  600).     He  was  a  contemporary  of  Solon,  who,  in 
an  extant  fragment  of  one  of  his  poems,  addresses  him  as  still  living.5 
No  other  biographical  particulars  respecting  him  have  come  down  to  us, 
except  what  is  mentioned  in  a  fragment  of  Hermesianax,6  of  his  love  for 
a  flute-player  named  Nanno,  who  does  not  seem  to  have  returned  his  af 
fection.7 

The  numerous  compositions  of  Mimnermus  were  preserved  for  several 
centuries,  comprised  in  two  books,  until  they  were  burned,  together  with 
most  of  the  other  monuments  of  the  erotic  poetry  of  the  Greeks  by  the 
Byzantine  monks.  A  few  fragments  only  have  come  down  to  us  ;  suffi 
cient,  however,  when  compared  with  the  notices  contained  in  ancient 
writers,  to  enable  us  to  form  a  tolerably  accurate  judgment  of  the  nature 
of  his  poetry.  These  fragments  belong  chiefly  to  a  poem  entitled  Nanno, 
and  addressed  to  the  flute-player  of  that  name.  The  compositions  of 
Mimnermus  form  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  elegiac  poetry.  Although 
the  elegy  had,  from  its  first  beginnings,  a  mournful  tendency,  and  had 
been  awarded  a  preference  in  odes  of  a  funebrial  and  melancholy  charac 
ter  by  Archilochus  and  other  early  poets,  Mimnermus  is  the  first  author 
who  peculiarly  and  systematically  adapted  it  to  the  more  tender  class  of 
plaintive  subjects.  Though  warlike  themes  were  not  altogether  unnoticed 
by  him,  and  though  the  subjection  of  a  large  part  of  Ionia,  and  especially 
of  his  native  city,  to  the  Lydian  yoke,  could  not  fail  to  produce  a  strong 
feeling  of  melancholy,  yet  he  seems,  on  the  whole,  to  have  spoken  of  val 
orous  deeds  more  in  a  tone  of  regret,  as  things  that  had  been,  than  with 
any  view  of  rousing  his  countrymen  to  imitate  them.  The  instability  of 
human  happiness,  the  helplessness  of  man,  the  cares  and  miseries  to  which 
life  is  exposed,  the  brief  season  that  man  has  to  enjoy  himself  in,  the 
wretchedness  of  old  age,  are  plaintively  dwelt  upon  by  him,  while  love  is 
held  up  as  the  only  consolation  that  men  possess,  life  not  being  worth 
having  when  it  can  no  longer  be  enjoyed.  The  latter  topic  was  most  fre 
quently  dwelt  upon,  and  as  an  erotic  poet  he  was  held  in  high  estimation 
in  antiquity.8 

i  Muller,Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  113.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. ;  Mutter,  p.  115. 

3  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  643.  4  Id.  ib.,  p.  634. 

*  Diog.  Latrrt.,  i.,  60  ;  Bergk,  Pocta  Lyrici  Grasd,  p.  331.  6  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  597. 

7  Compare,  however,  Mure ,  Grit.  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  334,  where  a  different  opinion  is  cx- 
pr,,S8«d  »  Hor.,  Epist.,  ii.,  2,  100  ;  Propert.,  i.,  9, 11. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  75 

From  the  general  character  of  his  poetry,  Mimnermus  received  the  ap 
pellation  of  At7uo-Tia57jy  or  Aiyvaa-TaS-rjs.  He  was  a  flute-player  as  well  as 
a  poet,1  and  in  setting  his  poems  to  music  he  made  use  of  the  plaintive 
melody  called  the  Nomos  kradias. 

So  highly  appreciated,  indeed,  were  the  claims  of  Mimnermus  to  nov 
elty,  if  not  to  absolute  originality,  as  regards  the  plaintive  character  of 
his  elegies,  and  so  marked  the  terms  in  which  they  were  asserted  by  his 
admirers,  as  to  have  led  superficial  critics,  both  ancient  and  modern,  to 
admit  him,  in  the  face  of  insuperable  chronological  difficulties,  to  a  com 
petition  with  Callinus  and  Archilochus  for  the  honor  of  inventing  the  ele 
giac  measure  itself.  Setting  aside,  however,  this  more  fanciful  title  to 
priority,  Mimnermus  enjoys,  perhaps  deservedly,  the  same  pre-eminence 
among  erotic  poets  of  the  elegiac  order,  as  Sappho  among  the  cultivators 
of  the  melic  branches  of  erotic  poetry.2 

The  fragments  of  Mimnermus  have  been  several  times  published,  in  the 
collections  of  Stephens,  Brunck,  Gaisford,  Boissonade,  and  Bergk.  There 
is  a  separate  edition  by  Bach,  Lips,  1826. 

6.  SOLON  (^,6\wv),  the  celebrated  legislator  of  Athens,  also  appears  in 
the  list  of  elegiac  poets,  but,  like  Archilochus,  and  Simonides  of  Amor- 
gus,  he  belongs  to  that  class  which  cultivated  iambic  verse  as  well  as 
elegiac,  and  will  therefore  be  considered  under  both  heads.  Of  his  poems 
several  fragments  remain.  The  whole  number  of  extant  verses  is  about 
two  hundred  and  seventy-five.  Of  these  upward  of  two  hundred  are  in 
elegiac  measure  ;  between  thirty  and  forty  are  iambic  trimeters ;  of  the 
remainder,  sixteen  are  trochaic  tetrameters ;  five  alone  are  in  purely  melic 
style.  The  two  hexameter  verses,  which  make  up  the  sum  total  of  the 
collection,  are  of  questionable  authenticity.  They  are  cited  by  Plutarch 
in  reference  to  a  tradition,  of  which  he  himself  appears  to  make  but  little 
account,  that  Solon  had  originally  intended  to  draw  up  his  code  in  a  met 
rical  form  ;  and  of  this  legislative  poem  they  profess  to  be  the  exordium.3 

The  longest  passage  of  the  collection,  comprising  seventy-six  elegiac 
verses,  in  essentially  gnomic*  style,  may  be  considered  as  a  fair  and  fa 
vorable  sample  of  the  general  character  of  Solon's  poetry.  It  contains  a 
summary  of  his  views  relative  to  the  tenor  of  his  life  and  conduct,  form 
ing  evidently  a  portion  of  his  "  Reflections  on  his  own  Affairs,"  which  last 
was  the  title  of  one  of  the  works  ascribed  to  him  by  the  ancients.  The 
doctrines  inculcated  are  sound,  often  original  and  striking  ;  are  expressed 
with  a  vigor  and  terseness  sometimes  bordering  on  abruptness,  and  are 
illustrated  by  some  spirited  imagery.  He  comments,  in  equally  emphatic 
but  less  querulous  terms  than  Mimnermus,  on  the  ephemeral  nature  of 
human  enjoyments ;  dwells  on  the  blessings  of  a  clear  conscience  and  a 
contented  mind ;  condemning  the  insatiable  thirst  of  mortals  for  the  pos 
session  of  a  happiness  beyond  their  reach,  and  their  wayward  caprice  in 
its  pursuit.  The  whole  is  pervaded  by  a  deep  tone  of  religious  feeling 
and  dependence  8 

1  Strab.,  iv.,  p.  643  ;  Hermesianax  ap.  Athen.,  1.  c.         2  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  339. 
3  Id.  ib.,  p.  363.  *  This  term  will  be  explained  under  the  article  Theogni*. 

5  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  364.     Compare  Mailer,  Hist.  fir.  Lit.,  p.  lly. 


76  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Another  bulky  text,  or  series  of  texts,  of  a  more  strictly  political  tend 
ency,  composed,  it  would  appear,  about  or  shortly  prior  to  the  epoch  of 
his  legislative  undertaking,  describes  in  the  same  elegiac  measure,  and  in 
equally  spirited  language,  the  evils  which  led  his  fellow-countrymen  to  re 
sort  to  his  healing  interposition.1 

Of  the  Salaminian  ode,  the  most  remarkable  of  all  Solon's  productions, 
and  by  which,  as  is  well  known,  he  sought  to  stimulate  the  Athenians  to 
reconquer  the  island  of  Salamis,  only  eight  elegiac  verses  are  extant,  com 
posed  in  a  spirited  vein  of  patriotism. 

The  merits  of  Solon  as  an  encourager  of  literature  are  chiefly  concen 
trated  around  his  regulations  for  the  more  orderly  recital  of  the  Homeric 
poems  in  the  public  festivities,  to  which  we  have  already  alluded.  He 
has  also  the  credit  of  having  interpolated  verse  558  of  the  Catalogue  of 
the  Forces,  in  support  of  the  claims  of  Athens  to  the  possession  of  Sala 
mis.  It  was  in  the  time  of  Solon  that  Thespis  introduced  his  improve 
ments  in  the  drama,  according  to  the  commonly  received  account,  and 
on  this  assumption  is  founded  the  story  told  by  Diogenes  Laertius2  of 
Solon's  having  expressed  great  anger  at  these  dramatic  entertainments, 
on  the  ground  of  the  deception  connected  with  them.  That  the  whole 
account,  however,  is  a  mere  fable,  is  sufficiently  clear  even  upon  chrono 
logical  grounds,  since  the  first  introduction  of  these  entertainments  at 
Athens  (535  B.C.)  took  place  twenty  years  after  the  death  of  Solon.3 

The  fragments  of  Solon  are  usually  incorporated  in  the  collections  of 
the  Greek  gnomic  poets,  as,  for  example,  in  those  of  Sylburg,  Brunck, 
and  Boissonade.  They  are  also  inserted  in  the  collections  of  Gaisford 
and  Schneidewin,  and  in  Bergk's  Poeta  Lyrici  Greed.  There  is  likewise 
a  separate  edition  by  Bach,  Lugd.  Bat.,  1825.  The  select  correspondence 
of  Solon  with  Periander,  Pisistratus,  Epimenides,  and  Croesus,  with  which 
Diogenes  Laertius  has  favored  us,  is  of  course  spurious. 

7.  THEOGNIS  (Qeoyvts)  of  Megara  was  an  elegiac  and  gnomic  poet,  whose 
reputed  works  form  the  most  extensive  collection  of  gnomic  poetry  that 
has  come  down  to  us  under  any  one  name  ;  but,  unfortunately,  the  form 
in  which  these  remains  exist  is  altogether  unsatisfactory.  The  term 
"  Gnomic"  (from  yv&ptu,  "  maxims,"  or  "  apophthegms")  appears  to  have 
been  originally  invented,  as  it  was  exclusively  employed,  to  denote  a 
school  of  elegiac  poetry,  the  object  of  which  was  to  inculcate  moral  doc 
trines,  rather  than  express  mental  emotions  ;  to  enforce  maxims  of 
worldly  wisdom  in  their  more  immediate -bearings  on  objects  of  special 
interest  to  the  author  or  his  public.  The  characteristic,  consequently, 
of  the  gnomic  style  was  a  sententious  gravity,  savoring  often  more  of 
philosophy  than  of  poetry.* 

Most  of  our  information  respecting  the  life  of  Theognis  is  derived  from 
his  own  writings.  He  was  a  native  of  Megara,  the  capital  of  Megaris, 
and  flourished  B.C.  548  or  544.  It  is  evident,  from  passages  in  his  po- 

i  Mure,  I.  c.  2  Di°g-  Laert.,  i.,  59. 

3  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  359,  where  the  error  of  Grote  (vol.  iii.,  p.  194)  and  of 
Smith  (Diet.  Biog.,  s.  v.)  is  noted,  both  of  whom  place  this  very  palpable  fable  respect 
ing  Thespis  among  the  ascertained  historical  facts  of  Solon's  life.  *  Mure,  I.  c. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  77 

ems,  that  he  lived  till  after  the  commencement  of  the  Persian  wars,  B.C. 
490.  Theognis  was  born  and  spent  his  life  in  the  midst  of  a  series  of 
conflicts  between  the  aristocracy  and  the  popular  party  in  Megara,  pro 
ducing  several  revolutions  and  counter-revolutions,  and  the  consequent 
banishing  and  return  of  exiles.  Theognis  belonged  to  the  party  of  the 
nobility,  being  himself  noble  by  birth.  In  one  of  these  revolutions,  when 
a  division  was  made  of  the  property  of  the  nobles,  Theognis  lost  his  all, 
and  was  cast  out  as  an  exile,  barely  escaping  with  his  life.  In  his  verses 
he  pours  out  his  indignation  upon  his  enemies,  laments  the  folly  of  the 
bad  pilots  by  whom  the  vessel  of  the  state  had  been  often  wrecked,  and 
speaks  of  the  common  people  with  unmeasured  contumely.  It  is  inter 
esting  to  observe  in  him,  on  these  occasions,  the  employment  of  certain 
terms  in  their  early  or  political  meaning,  as  contradistinguished  from 
their  later  and  ethical  one,  although,  even  in  his  own  verses,  this  ethical 
meaning  is  not  absolutely  unknown,  but  only  rare.  Thus,  by  aya8oi, 
eV0A<n,  XPT?O"T<H,  &c.,  are  commonly  meant  the  noble  or  upper  classes,  and 
by  KaKoi,  SeiAoi,  &c.,  the  lower  orders,  the  mean.1 

Most  of  these  political  verses  are  addressed  to  a  certain  Cyrnus,  the 
son  of  Polypas,  for  it  is  now  generally  admitted  that  the  name  IIoAt/Trcu- 
STJS,  which  has  been  sometimes  supposed  to  refer  to  a  different  person,  is 
to  be  understood  as  a  patronymic,  and  as  applying  to  Cyrnus.  From  the 
verses  themselves,  as  well  as  from  the  statements  of  the  ancient  writers, 
it  appears  that  Cyrnus  was  a  young  man  toward  whom  Theognis  cher 
ished  a  warm  and  firm  friendship. 

The  other  fragments  of  the  poetry  of  Theognis  are  of  a  social,  most  of 
them  of  a  festive  character.  They  place  us,  as  Miiller  remarks,  in  the 
midst  of  a  circle  of  friends,  who  formed  a  kind  of  eating  society,  like  the 
philitia  of  Sparta,  and  like  the  ancient  public  tables  of  Megara  itself.2 
All  the  members  of  this  society  belonged  to  the  class  whom  the  poet 
calls  "  the  good."  The  collection  of  gnomic  poetry,  which  has  come 
down  to  us  under  the  name  of  Theognis,  contains,  however,  many  addi 
tions  from  later  poets.  The  genuine  fragments  contain  much  that  is 
highly  poetical  in  thought,  and  elegant  as  well  as  forcible  in  expression. 

There  are  two  standard  modern  editions  of  the  remains  of  Theognis, 
that  of  Bekker,  who  has  preserved  the  order  of  the  MSS.,  Lips.,  1815, 
and  2d  ed.,  1827,  8vo ;  and  that  of  Welcker,  who  has  rearranged  the 
verses,  Francof,  1826,  8vo.  There  is  also  an  edition  of  the  text,  with 
critical  notes,  by  Orelli,  Turic.,  1840,  4to.  The  poems  are  also  contained 
in  several  modern  collections,  and  particularly  in  Schneidewin's  Delectus 
Poesis  Grcecorum,  Getting.,  1838,  8vo ;  Bergk's  Poetce  Lyrici  Greed,  Lips., 
1843, 8vo,  and  in  Gaisford's  Poetce  Minores  Greed,  Oxon.,  1814-1820 ;  Lips., 
1823,  8vo. 

8.  PHOCYLIDES  (4>coKuAi5?js)  of  Miletus,  an  Ionian  poet,  was  contempo 
rary  with  Theognis,  both  having  been  born,  according  to  Suidas,  in  the 
55th  Olympiad,  B.C.  560,  which  agrees  with  Eusebius,  who  places  Pho- 
cylides  at  01.  60  (B.C.  540)  as  a  contemporary  of  the  lyric  poet  Simonides. 

1  Welcker,  Prolegom.  ad  Theogn.     Compare  Grote,  Hist.  Gr.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  62,  note- 

2  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  123. 


78  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

According  to  Suidas,  he  wrote  epic  poems  and  elegies,  among  which 
were  Tlapaii/ea-eis  or  Tvw^ai,  which  were  also  called  Ke^aAota.  This  gnom 
ic  poetry  shows  the  reason  why  Suidas  calls  him  a  philosopher.  Most  of 
the  few  fragments  we  possess  are  of  this  character ;  and  they  display 
that  contempt  for  birth  and  station,  and  that  love  for  substantial  enjoy 
ment,  which  always  marked  the  Ionian  character.  The  didactic  charac 
ter  of  his  poetry  is  shown  by  the  frequent  occurrence  of  verses  beginning 
Kcu  r68e  $caKv\t8ew.  These  words  no  doubt  formed  the  heading  of  each 
of  those  sections  (/ce^aAata),  in  which,  as  we  have  seen  from  Suidas,  the 
poems  of  Phocylides  were  arranged.  We  possess  only  about  eighteen 
short  fragments  of  his  poems,  of  which  only  two  are  in  elegiac  metre, 
and  the  rest  in  hexameters.  They  have  been  included  in  all  the  chief 
collections  of  the  lyric  and  gnomic  poets,  from  that  of  Constantino  Las- 
caris,  Venet.,  1494,  1495,  4to,  down  to  those  of  Gaisford,  Schneidewin, 
and  Bergk.  There  is  a  separate  edition  by  Schier,  Lips.,  1751. 

9.  XENOPHANES  CEfvoQdvrjs)  of  Colophon,  who,  about  the  68th  Olympiad 
(508  B.C.),  founded  the  celebrated  Eleatic  school  of  philosophy,1  at  an 
earlier  period,  while  he  was  still  living  at  Colophon,  gave  vent  to  his 
thoughts  and  feelings  on  the  circumstances  surrounding  him  in  the  form 
of  elegies.     These  elegies  were  symposiac  in  their  character.     There  is 
preserved  in  Athenaeus  a  considerable  fragment,  in  which  the  beginning  of 
a  symposium  is  described  with  much  distinctness  and  elegance.    In  his  el 
egies,  also,  we  see  exhibited  the  direction  of  his  mind  toward  investiga 
tion,  and  his  earnest  view  of  life.     He  derides  in  them  the  Pythagorean 
doctrine  of  the  migration  of  souls  ;2  makes  good  the  claims  of  wisdom  in 
opposition  to  the  excessive  admiration  of  the  bodily  strength  and  activity 
by  which  the  victory  was  gained  in  athletic  games  ;3  lashes  the  effemin 
ate  luxury  of  the  lonians,  which  they  had  imitated  from  the  Lydians,4  &c. 
The  fragments  of  Xenophanes  are  contained  in  the  collections  of  Schneid 
ewin  and  Bergk:  there  is  a  separate  edition  by  Karsten,  Bruxell.,  1830. 5 

10.  SIMONIDES  (2,ifjLa}viSr]s)  of  Ceos,  one  of  the  most  celebrated  lyric  po 
ets  of  Greece,  was  the  perfecter  of  the  elegy  and  epigram,  and  the  rival 
of  Lasus  and  Pindar  in  the  dithyramb  and  the  epinician  ode.     As  a  lyric 
poet,  however,  he  will  be  considered  elsewhere.     He  is  stated  to  have 
been  victorious  at  Athens  over  ^Eschylus  himself,  in  an  elegy  in  honor 
of  those  who  fell  at  Marathon,  the  Athenians  having  instituted  a  contest 
of  the  chief  poets.    The  ancient  biographer  of  yEschylus,  who  gives  this 
account,  adds  in  explanation  that  the  elegy  requires  a  tenderness  of  feel 
ing  which  was  foreign  to  the  character  of  ^Eschylus.     To  what  degree 
Simonides  possessed  this  quality,  and,  in  general,  how  great  a  master  he 
was  of  the  pathetic,  is  proved  by  his  celebrated  lyric  piece  containing  the 
lament  of  Danae,  and  by  other  remains  of  his  poetry.     Simonides  like 
wise,  like  Archilochus  and  others,  used  the  elegy  as  a  plaintive  song  for 
the  deaths  of  individuals ;  at  least  the  Greek  Anthology  contains  several 
pieces  of  Simonides,  which  appear  to  be  not  entire  epigrams,  but  frag- 

1  Plat.,  Soph.,  p.  242;  Arist.,  Met.,  ii.,  5.     Compare  Cousin,  Nouveaux  Frag.  PMlos., 
p.  9,  seqq.  2  Frag,  xviii.  3  Frag.  xix.  «  Frag,  xx 

6  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  124  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 


79 


ments  of  longer  elegies  lamenting  with  heartfelt  pathos  the  death  of  per 
sons  dear  to  the  poet.  Among  these  are  the  verses  concerning  Gorgo, 
who,  dying,  utters  these  words  to  her  mother :  "  Remain  here  with  my 
father,  and  become,  with  a  happier  fate,  the  mother  of  another  daughter, 
who  may  tend  you  in  your  old  age."1 

XIII.  This  place  is  the  most  convenient  for  mentioning  a  subordinate 
kind  of  poetry,  namely,  the  Epigram,  as  the  elegiac  form  was  the  best 
suited  to  it,  although  there  are  also  epigrams  composed  in  hexameters 
and  other  metres. 


EPIGRAM. 


XIV.  The  Epigram  (<Mypa^a)  was  originally,  as  its  name  imports,  an 
inscription  either  on  a  tombstone,  or  on  a  votive  offering  in  a  temple,  or  on 
any  other  object  which  required  explanation.     Afterward,  from  the  anal 
ogy  of  these  real  epigrams,  thoughts  excited  by  the  view  of  any  object, 
and  which  might  have  served  as  an  inscription,  were  called  epigrams,  and 
expressed  in  the  same  form.     That  this  form  was  the  elegiac  may  have 
arisen  from  the  circumstance  that  epitaphs  appeared  closely  allied  to  la 
ments  for  the  dead,  which,  as  we  have  before  remarked,  were  composed 
in  this  metre.     However,  as  this  elegy  comprehended  all  the  events  of 
life  which  caused  a  strong  emotion,  so  the  epigram  might  be  equally  in 
place  on  a  monument  of  war,  and  on  the  sepulchral  pillar  of  a  beloved 
kinsman  or  friend. 

XV.  The  unexpected  turn  of  thought  and  the  pointedness  of  expres 
sion,  which  the  moderns  consider  as  the  essence  of  this  species  of  com 
position,  were  not  required  in  the  ancient  Greek  epigram ;   in  this  noth 
ing  more  is  requisite  than  that  the  entire  thought  should  be  conveyed 
within  the  limits  of  a  few  distichs  ;  and  thus,  in  the  hands  of  the  early 
poets,  the  epigram  was  remarkable  for  the  conciseness  and  expressive 
ness  of  its  language  ;  differing  in  this  respect  from  the  elegy,  in  which  a 
full  vent  was  given  to  the  feelings  of  the  poet. 

XVI.  Epigrams  were  probably  composed  in  an  elegiac  form,  shortly  after 
the  time  when  the  elegy  first  arose  ;  and  the  collection  which  has  come 
down  to  us  contains  some  under  the  celebrated  names  of  Archilochus, 
Sappho,  and  Anacreon.     No  peculiar  character,  however,  is  to  be  ob 
served  in  the  genuine  epigrams  of  this  early  period.     It  was  Simonides 
of  Ceos  who  first  gave  to  the  epigram  the  perfection  of  which,  consist 
ently  with  its  purpose,  it  was  capable.     In  this  respect  Simonides  was 
favored  by  the  circumstances  of  his  time ;  for,  on  account  of  the  high  con 
sideration  which  he  enjoyed  both  in  Athens  and  throughout  the  Pelopon 
nesus,  he  was  frequently  employed  by  the  states  which  had  fought  against 
the  Persians,  to  adorn  with  inscriptions  the  tombs  of  their  fallen  warri 
ors.     The  best  and  most  celebrated  of  these  epitaphs  is  the  inimitable  in 
scription  on  the  Spartans  who  died  at  Thermopylae,  which  actually  exist 
ed  on  the  spot :  "  Stranger,  tell  the  Lacedaemonians  that  we  are  lying  here 
in  obedience  to  their  laws."3    Never  was  heroic  courage  expressed  with 
such  calm  and  unadorned  grandeur. 

1  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  125.         2  lb.,  p.  I26,seqq.        3  Simonides,  Frag.  27,  ed.  Gai.sf. 


80 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


XVII.  There  are,  besides, not  a  few  epigrams  of  Simonides,  which  were 
intended  for  the  tombstones  of  individuals ;  among  these  we  will  men 
tion  only  one,  which  differs  from  the  others  in  being  a  sarcasm  in  the  form 
of  an  epitaph.     It  is  that  on  the  Rhodian  lyric  poet  and  athlete  Timocre- 
on,  an  opponent  of  Simonides  in  his  art :  "  Having  eaten  much,  and  drunk 
much,  and  said  much  evil  of  other  men,  here  I  lie,  Timocreon  the  Rho 
dian."1 

XVIII.  With  the  epitaphs  are  naturally  connected  the  inscriptions  on 
sacred  offerings,  especially  where  both  refer  to  the  Persian  war ;  the  for 
mer  being  the  discharge  of  a  debt  to  the  dead,  the  latter  a  thanksgiving 
of  the  survivors  to  the  gods.     Among  the  best  of  these  is  one  referring 
to  the  battle  of  Marathon,  which,  from  the  neatness  and  elegance  of  the 
expression,  loses  its  chief  beauty  in  a  prose  translation.     It  was  inscribed 
on  the  statue  of  Pan,  which  the  Athenians  had  set  up  in  a  grotto  under 
their  Acropolis,  because  the  Arcadian  god  had,  according  to  the  popular 
belief,  assisted  them  at  Marathon.     "  Miltiades  set  me  up,  the  cloven- 
footed  Pan,  the  Arcadian,  who  took  part  against  the  Medes,  and  with  the 
Athenians."     The  original  runs  as  follows  : 

Tbv  rpayoTTovv  e/ie  Tlava,  TOV  'ApKaSa,  rbv  Kara  Mrjfiwi', 
rbv  per  'A0ijvcuW,  cmjo-aro  M(.A.TtaSrjs.2 

XIX.  But  Simonides  sometimes  condescended  to  express  sentiments 
which  he  could  not  have  shared,  as  in  the  inscription  on  the  tripod  con 
secrated  at  Delphi,  which  the  Greeks  afterward  caused  to  be  erased,  "  Pau- 
sanias,  the  commander  of  the  Greeks,  having  destroyed  the  army  of  the 
Medes,  dedicated  this  memorial  to  Phoebus."    These  verses  express  the 
arrogance  of  the  Spartan  general,  which  the  good  sense  and  moderation 
of  the  poet  would  never  have  approved.     The  form  of  nearly  all  these 
epigrams  of  Simonides  is  the  elegiac.     Simonides  usually  adhered  to  it, 
except  when  a  name  (on  account  of  a  short  between  two  long  syllables) 
could  not  be  adapted  to  the  dactylic  metre,  as,  for  instance,  'Apxfvavr-rjs, 
'IinrfoiKos :  in  which  cases  he  employed  trochaic  measures.    The  charac 
ter  of  the  language,  and  especially  the  dialect,  also  remained,  on  the 
whole,  true  to  the  elegiac  type,  except  that,  in  inscriptions  for  monuments 
designed  for  Doric  tribes,  traces  of  the  Doric  dialect  sometimes  occur. 

XX.  The  term  Anthology  is  peculiarly  appropriated  to  a  collection  of 
epigrams.     The  largest  portion  of  those  collected  in  the  Greek  Anthology, 
as  it  exists  at  the  present  day,  was  written  in  honor  of  the  dead,  intro 
ducing  their  names  and  characters,  or  occupations  ;  or  as  tributes  to  beau 
ty,  in  gratitude  for  acceptance,  or  in  complaint  on  account  of  rejection ; 
some  of  them  are  panegyrics  on  living  and  illustrious  virtue  ;  others  con 
tain  brief  records  of  remarkable  events  ;  others,  again,  consist  of  observa 
tions  on  human  life,  for  the  most  part  in  a  dark  style  of  coloring.     The 
weariness  of  old  age,  the  shortness  and  unsatisfactory  tenor  of  human  life, 
the  murmurs  of  sickness,  and  the  miseries  of  poverty,  are  favorite  topics. 
Bacchanalian  poetry  is  mixed  up  with  exhortations  to  eat  and  drink,  for  to 
morrow  we  die.     This  prevailing  tendency  must  be  ascribed  to  the  vague 
notions,  undefined  prospects,  and  differently  sustained  hopes  respecting 

1  Frag.  58.  2  ft,  25. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  81 

our  transition  into  some  other  state  of  existence,  by  which  the  philoso 
phers,  poets,  and  ordinary  men  of  those  times  were  equally  perplexed. 
But,  however  gloomy  this  view  of  things  might  be,  it  was  compatible 
with  a  not  unpleasing  pathos,  and  raised  their  amatory  and  convivial  ef 
fusions  above  vulgar  voluptuousness  or  mere  festive  riot.1 

LITERARY    HISTORY    OF    THE    GREEK    ANTHOLOGY.2 

I.  The  earliest  known  collection  of  inscriptions  was  made  by  the  geog 
rapher  Polemon  (B.C.  200),  in  a  work  irepl  rSJv  Kara  Tr6\€is  eTi^pa^juarwy.3 
He  also  wrote  other  works  on  votive  offerings,  which  probably  contained 
the  epigrammatic  inscriptions  on  them.     Similar  collections  were  made 
by  Alcetas,  Trepi  T&V  *v  AeA^oTs  avad-n/JLaTcav  ;*  by  Menetor,  eV  rep  TTfpl  ava- 
e-n/j-druv  ;5  and  perhaps  by  Apellas  Ponticus.     These  persons  collected 
chiefly  the  inscriptions  on  offerings  (avae^/j.ara').    Epigrams  of  other  kinds 
were  also  collected,  as  the  Theban  Epigrams,  by  Aristodemus  ;6  the  Attic, 
by  Philochorus;  and  others  by  Neoptolemus  of  Paros,7  and  Euhemerus.8 

II.  The  above  compilers  chiefly  collected  epigrams  of  particular  classes, 
and  with  reference  to  their  use  as  historical  authorities.    The  first  person 
who  made  such  a  collection  solely  for  its  own  sake,  and  to  preserve  epi 
grams  of  all  kinds,  was  MELEAGER,  a  Cynic  philosopher  of  Gadara,  in 
Palestine,  about  B.C.  60.     His  collection  contained  epigrams  by  no  less 
than  forty-six  poets  of  all  ages  of  Greek  poetry,  up  to  the  most  ancient 
lyric  period.     He  entitled  it  the  Garland  (Sre'^cwos),  with  reference,  of 
course,  to  the  common  comparison  of  small  beautiful  poems  to  flowers ; 
and,  in  the  introduction  to  his  work,  he  attaches  the  names  of  various 
flowers;  shrubs,  and  herbs,  as  emblems,  to  the  names  of  the  several  poets. 
The  same  idea  is  kept  up  in  the  word  Anthology  (avdoXoyia),  or  "nosegay," 
which  was  adopted  by  the  next  compiler  as  the  title  of  his  work.     The 
Garland  of  Meleager  was  arranged  in  alphabetical  order,  according  to  the 
initial  letters  of  the  first  line  of  each  epigram. 

III.  In  the  time  of  Trajan,  as  it  seems,  PHILIP  of  THESSALONICA  com 
piled  his  Anthology  ( 'AvGoXoyia),  avowedly  in  imitation  of  the  Garland  of 
Meleager,  and  chiefly  with  the  view  of  adding  to  that  collection  the  epi 
grams  of  more  recent  writers.     The  arrangement  of  this  work  was  the 
same  as  that  of  Meleager.     It  was  also  entitled  (Trfyavos,  as  well  as  o.v- 
6o\oyia.     Another  title  by  which  it  is  quoted  is  <rv\\oy^  i/eW  eVrypa/u/ia- 
TUV.     Shortly  after  Philip,  in  the  reign  of  Hadrian,  the  learned  gramma 
rian,  DIOGENIANUS  of  Heraclea,  compiled  an  Anthology,  which  is  entirely 
lost.     It  might,  perhaps,  have  been  well  if  the  same  fate  had  befallen  the 
very  polluted,  though  often  beautiful  collection  of  his  contemporary,  Stra- 
ton  of  Sardis.     About  the  same  time,  Diogenes  Laertius  collected  the  epi 
grams,  which  are  interspersed,  in  his  lives  of  the  philosophers,  into  a  sep 
arate  book,  under  the  title  of  ^  Tra/u^erpos.     This  collection,  however,  as 
containing  only  the  poems  of  Diogenes  himself,  must  rather  be  viewed  as 


1  Penny  Cyclop.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  95.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biog.,  s.  v.  Planudes. 

3  Athen.,  x.,  p.  436,  d. ;  p.  442,  e.  *  Id.,  xiii.,  p.  591,  c.  *  Id.  ib.,  p.  594,  d. 

e  Schol.  in  Apoll.  Rhod.,  ii.,  906.  '  Athen.,  x.,  p.  454,/. 

8  Lactant.,  Instit.  Div.,  i,,  9  ;  Cic.,  N.  D.,  i.,  42, 

F 


82  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

among  the  materials  of  the  later  Anthologies  than  as  an  Anthology  in 
itself. 

IV.  During  the  long  period  from  the  decline  of  original  literature  to  the 
era  when  the  imitative  compositions  of  the  Constantinopolitan  gramma 
rians  had  reached  their  height,  we  find  no  more  Anthologies.     The  next 
was  the  Ku/cAos  fTrLypafjLfj.druv  of  AGATHIAS  SCHOLASTICUS,  who  lived  in  the 
time  of  Justinian.    It  was  divided  into  seven  books,  according  to  subjects, 
and  was  the  earliest  Anthology  so  arranged.     The  poems  included  in  it 
were  those  of  recent  writers,  and  chiefly  those  of  Agathias  himself  and 
of  his  contemporaries,  such  as  Paulus  Silentiarius  and  Macedonius. 

V.  Next  in  order  is  the  Anthology  of  CONSTANTINUS  CEPHALAS,  called 
also  the  Palatine  Anthology.     Constantinus   Cephalas  appears  to  have 
lived  about  four  centuries  after  Agathias,  and  to  have  flourished  in  the 
tenth  century,  under  the  Emperor  Constantinus  Porphyrogennetus.1    The 
labors  of  preceding  compilers  may  be  viewed  as  merely  supplementary 
to  the  Garland  of  Meleager;   but  the  Anthology  of  Cephalas  was  an 
entirely  new  collection  from  the  preceding  Anthologies  and  from  original 
sources.     Nothing  is  known  of  Cephalas  himself.     Modern  scholars  had 
never  even  heard  his  name  till  it  was  brought  to  light  by  the  fortunate 
discovery  of  Salmasius.     That  great  scholar,  when  a  very  young  man, 
visited  Hejdelberg  about  the  end  of  the  year  160G,  and  there,  in  the  library 
of  the  Electors  Palatine,  he  found  the  MS.  collection  of  Greek  epigrams, 
which  was  afterward  removed  to  the  Vatican,  with  the  rest  of  the  Pala 
tine  library,  in  1623,  and  has  become  celebrated  under  the  names  of  the 
Palatine  Anthology,  and  the  Vatican  Codex  of  the  Greek  Anthology.     This 
MS.  was  transferred  to  Paris  upon  the  peace  of  Tolentino  in  1797 ;  and, 
after  the  peace  of  1815,  it  was  restored  to  its  old  home  at  Heidelberg, 
where  it  now  lies  in  the  University  library. 

VI.  Salmasius  at  once  saw  that  it  was  quite  a  different  work  from  the 
Planudean  Anthology  (to  be  mentioned  presently).     He  collated  it  with 
Weichel's  edition  of  the  same  work,  and  copied  out  those  epigrams  which 
were  not  contained  in  the  latter.     The  work  thus  discovered  soon  became 
known  among  the  scholars  of  the  day  as  the  Anthologia  inedita  codicis 
Palatini.     The  MS.  is  written  on  parchment,  of  a  quarto  form,  though 
somewhat  longer  than  it  is  broad,  and  contains  710  pages,  without  reck 
oning  three  leaves  at  the  commencement,  which  are  stuck  together,  and 
which  are  also  full  of  epigrams.     The  writing  is  by  different  hands,  of 
different  ages.     The  most  ancient  handwriting  is  supposed  to  be  of  the 
eleventh  century.    The  time  of  the  others  can  not  be  fixed  with  any  cer 
tainty.    Of  the  compiler  Cephalas,  and  his  labors,  the  only  mention  made 
is  in  the  MS.  itself.     In  one  passage  (p.  81)  a  marginal  scholium  states 
that  Cephalas  arranged  the  Garland  of  Meleager,  dividing  it  into  different 
chapters  ;  namely,  amatory,  dedicatory,  monumental,  and  epideictic.    The 
work  itself,  however,  shows  that  this  is  not  all  that  Cephalas  did,  and  that 
the  mention  of  Meleager,  and  of  the  titles  of  each  section,  are  only  given 
by  way  of  example. 

VII.  The  Anthology  of  Cephalas  seems  to  have  been  compiled  from  the 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  p.  387. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  83 

old  Anthologies,  as  a  basis,  with  the  addition  of  other  epigrams.  He  ap 
pears  to  have  extracted  in  turn  from  Meleager,  Philip,  Agathias,  &c., 
those  epigrams  which  suited  his  purpose,  and  his  work  often  exhibits 
traces  of  the  alphabetical  order  of  the  Garland  of  Meleager.  With  respect 
to  arrangement,  he  seems  to  have  taken  the  K&cAos  of  Agathias  as  a 
foundation,  for  both  works  are  alike  in  the  division  of  their  subjects,  and 
in  the  titles  prefixed  to  the  epigrams.  The  order  of  the  books,  however, 
is  different,  and  one  book  of  Agathias,  namely,  the  descriptions  of  works 
of  art,  is  altogether  omitted  by  Cephalas.  It  is  also  to  be  observed  that 
the  Palatine  Anthology  contains  ancient  epigrams  which  had  not  ap 
peared  in  any  of  the  preceding  Anthologies,  hut  had  been  preserved  in 
some  other  way. 

VIII.  Last  in  order  is  the  Anthology  of  PLANUDES,  a  learned  monk  of 
the  last  age  of  the  Greek  empire.    It  is  arranged  in  seven  books,  each  of 
which,  except  the  fifth  and  seventh,  is  divided  into  chapters,  according  to 
subjects,  and  these  chapters  are  arranged  in  alphabetical  order.     The 
chapters  of  the  first  book,  for  example,  run  thus  :  1.  Els  ^Aywas.     2.  Els 
&fj.Tre\ov.     3.   Ets  avaO^fj-ara,  and  so  on,  to  91.  Els  &pas.     According  to 
Brunck  and  Jacobs,  Planudes  did  little  more  than  abridge  and  rearrange 
the  Anthology  of  Cephalas.    Only  a  few  epigrams  are  found  in  the  Planu- 
dean  Anthology  which  are  not  in  the  Palatine.    From  the  time  of  its  first 
publication  at  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century,  down  to  the  discovery  of  the 
Palatine  Anthology  in  the  seventeenth,  the  Planudean  Anthology  was 
esteemed  one  of  the  greatest  treasures  of  antiquity,  and  was  known  un 
der  the  name  of  the  Greek  Anthology.    Planudes,  however,  was  but  ill  quali 
fied  for  the  duties  of  editor  of  such  a  work.    Devoid  of  true  poetical  taste, 
he  brought  to  his  task  the  conceit  and  rashness  of  a  mere  litcratus.  The  dis 
covery  of  the  Palatine  Anthology  soon  taught  scholars  how  much  they  had 
over-estimated  the  worth  of  the  Anthology  of  Planudes.     On  comparing 
the  two  collections,  it  is  manifest  that  Planudes  was  not  only  guilty  of  the 
necessary  carelessness  of  a  mere  compiler,  but  also  of  the  willful  faults  of 
a  conceited  monk,  tampering  with  words,  "  expurgating"  whole  couplets 
and  epigrams,  and  interpolating  his  own  frigid  verses.     He  reaped  the 
reward  which  often  crowns  the  labors  of  bad  editors  who  undertake  great 
works.   The  pretensions  of  his  compilation  insured  its  general  acceptance, 
and  prevented  not  only  the  execution  of  a  better  work,  which  in  that  age 
could  scarcely  be  hoped  for,  but,  what  was  far  more  important,  the  mul 
tiplication  of  copies  of  the  more  ancient  Anthologies  ;  and  thus  modern 
scholars  are  reduced  to  one  MS.  of  the  Anthology  of  Cephalas,  which,  ex 
cellent  as  it  is,  leaves  many  hopeless  difficulties  for  the  critic. 

IX.  The  last  and-  most  perfect  of  the  editions  of  the  Planudean  Anthol 
ogy  is  that  which  was  commenced  by  Hieronymus  de  Bosch,  and  finished 
after  his  death  by  Van  Lennep,  in  5  vols.,  4to,  Ultraj.,  1795-1822.     This 
splendid  edition  is  not  only  useful  for  those  who  wish  to  read  the  Greek 
Anthology  in  the  form  in  which  it  was  compiled  by  Planudes,  but  it  is  val 
uable  on  account  of  the  large  mass  of  illustrative  matter  which  it  contains, 
including  the  notes  of  Huet,  Sylburg,  and  other  scholars ;  but  above  ali 
for  the  metrical  Latin  versions  of  Grotius,  which  arc  esteemed  by  far  the 


84  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

best  of  his  productions  in  that  department  of  scholarship,  and  which  have 
never  been  printed  except  in  this  edition.  The  Greek  text,  however,  is 
only  a  reprint  of  the  Wechelian  edition  of  1600,1  with  many  of  its  worst 
errors  uncorrected. 

X.  In  the  years  1772-1776,  appeared  the  Analecta  Veterum  Poetarum 
Gracorum  of  Brunck,  Argentorati,  3  vols.  8vo,  which  contains  the  whole 
of  the  Greek  Anthology,  besides  some  poems  which  are  not  properly  in 
cluded  under  that  title.  The  epigrams  of  the  Anthology  were  edited  by 
Brunck,  from  a  careful  comparison  of  the  Planudean  Anthology  with  vari 
ous  copies  of  the  Vatican  Codex  ;  and  they  now  appeared  for  the  first  time 
revised  by  a  scholar  competent  to  the  task.  Brunck  also  adopted  a  new 
arrangement,  which  certainly  has  its  defects,  but  yet  is  invaluable  for  the 
student  of  the  history  of  Greek  literature.  Discarding  altogether  the  books 
and  chapters  of  the  early  Anthology,  he  placed  together  all  the  epigrams 
of  each  poet,  and  arranged  the  poets  themselves  in  chronological  order, 
placing  those  epigrams,  the  authors  of  which  were  unknown,  under  the 
separate  head  of  dSeWora. 

XL  Important,  however,  as  Brunck's  edition  was  when  it  was  pub 
lished,  it  has  been  entirely  superseded  by  the  edition  of  Jacobs.  The 
original  plan  of  the  last  mentioned  scholar  was  only  to  form  a  complete 
commentary  on  Brunck's  Analecta,  but  the  scarceness  of  copies  of  that 
work  induced  him  to  reprint  it,  omitting  those  parts  which  do  not  prop 
erly  belong  to  the  Greek  Anthology,  and  carefully  re-editing  the  whole. 
The  result  of  his  labors  was  a  work  which  ranks  most  deservedly  as  the 
standard  edition  of  the  Greek  Anthology.  It  is  in  8  vols.,  or  13  parts,  8vo, 
viz.,  4  vols.  of  the  text,  one  of  Indices,  and  three  of  Commentaries,  di 
vided  into  eight  parts.  In  editing  his  Anthologia  Graca,  Jacobs  had  the  full 
benefit  of  the  Palatine  Anthology.  Not  content  with  the  almost  perfect 
transcript  made  by  Spalletti  in  1776,  and  which,  from  its  having  been 
purchased  by  Ernest  II.,  duke  of  Gotha,  for  the  library  at  Gotha,  is  com 
monly  called  the  Apographum  Gothanum,  Jacobs  availed  himself  of  the 
services  of  Uhden,  then  Prussian  ambassador  at  Rome,  who  collated  the 
copy  once  more  with  the  original  codex  in  the  Vatican.  The  important 
results  are  to  be  found  in  Jacobs'  emendations  of  Brunck's  text,  in  his 
corrections  of  many  of  Brunck's  errors  in  the  assignment  of  epigrams  to 
wrong  authors,  and  in  his  Appendix  of  213  epigrams  from  the  Vatican 
MS.,  which  are  wanting  in  the  Analecta.  In  the  mean  time,  he  formed 
the  design  of  rendering  to  scholarship  the  great  service  of  printing  an 
exact  and  complete  edition  of  this  celebrated  codex.  After  the  printing 
of  the  text  was  completed,  the  unlooked-for  restoration  of  the  MS.  to  the 
University  library  at  Heidelberg  afforded  an  opportunity  for  a  new  col 
lation,  which  was  made  by  Paulssen,  who  has  given  the  results  of  it  in 

1  The  Wechelian  edition  (Francofurti,  apud  Claudium  Marnium  et  Jo.  Aubriwn,  1600, 
fol.)  is,  in  the  text,  a  mere  reprint  of  that  of  Stephanus,  with  few  of  its  errors  corrected, 
and  many  new  ones  introduced.  It  is,  however,  of  considerable  value,  as  it  contains, 
besides  some  new  scholia,  and  the  notes  of  Obsopspus  and  Stephanus,  the  whole  of  the 
excellent  commentary  of  Brodaeus.  In  spite  of  its  faults,  it  remained  for  nearly  two  cen 
turies,  nntil  the  publication  of  Brunck's  Analecta,  the  standard  edition  of  the  Greek  An 
thology. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 


85 


an  Appendix  to  the  third  volume  of  Jacobs'  Anthologia  Palatina.  This 
work  may,  therefore,  be  considered  an  all  but  perfect  copy  of  the  Palatine 
Codex,  and  is  hence  invaluable  for  the  critical  study  of  the  Anthology. 
It  was  published  at  Leipsic,  1813-1817,  in  3  vols.  Svo.1 

XII.  Immense,  however,  as  were  Jacobs'  services  for  the  Greek  An 
thology,  much  has  still  been  left  for  his  successors  to  accomplish,  in  the 
further  correction  of  the  text,  the  investigation  of  the  sources  and  forms 
of  the  earlier  Anthologies,  the  more  accurate  assignment  of  many  epi 
grams  to  their  right  authors,  and  the  collection  of  additional  epigrams, 
especially  from  recently-discovered  inscriptions.  The  great  scholars  of 
Germany,  such  as  Hermann,  Welcker,  Meineke,  and  others,2  have  not 
neglected  this  duty,  and,  in  particular^  new  edition  of  the  Anthology  is 
said  to  be  in  preparation  by  Meineke,  who  is,  perhaps,  better  qualified  for 
the  task  than  any  other  living  scholar. 


CHAPTER  XV. 
SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 

LYRIC  POETRY — continued. 


I.  THE  invention  of  Iambic  verse,  the  rival  of  the  Elegy  in  antiquity 
and  early  popularity,  was  familiarly  ascribed  by  the  ancients,  as  was  that 
of  many  other  metrical  forms,  to  Archilochus.4    In  the  Margitcs,  how 
ever,  a  poem  of  very  early  date,  and  assigned  by  Aristotle  to  Homer  him 
self,  iambic  verses  were  introduced  with  heroic  hexameters.     It  must  be 
presumed,  therefore,  either  that  the  respectable  authors  who  attribute 
the  invention  of  the  former  measure  to  Archilochus,  differed  from  Aris 
totle  as  to  the  genuine  antiquity  of  the  Margitcs,  or  that  the  term  Inven 
tion,  as  here  applied  by  them,  relates  merely  to  the  regular  poem  of  con 
tinuous  trimeters,  to  which,  in  popular  usage,  the  phrase  Iambic  measure 
was  appropriated. 

II.  But  the  nature  and  spirit  of  Iambic  verse,  still  more,  perhaps,  than 
of  the  Elegy,  entitle  us  to  look,  for  its  first  beginnings  at  least,  to  the 
spontaneous  effort  of  the  primitive  muse,  rather  than  to  the  artifice  of  a 
politer  age.    The  component  elements  of  the  elegy  were  contained  in  the 
old  hexameter.     It  might  very  naturally  occur,  therefore,  to  an  ingenious 
master  of  later  times  to  invent  a  new  form  to  suit  a  new  purpose,  by 
curtailing  two  syllables  of  every  alternate  verse  ;  for  such,  in  fact,  is  the 

1  The  following  is  its  title  :  Anthologia  Grceca,  ad  fidem  Coditis  Palatini,  nunc  Pansi- 
m,  ex  Apographo  Gothano  edita.     Curavit,  Epigrammata  in  Codice  Palatino  desiderata  ct 
Annotationem  criticam  adjecit  F.  Jacobs,  &c. 

2  Welcker,  Sylloge  Epigramm.  Gr<zc.,  Bonn.,  1828,  Svo,  with  Hermann's  review  in  the 
Ephem.  Lit.  Lips.,  1829,  Nos.  148-151  ;  and  Welcker's  reply,  Abweisung  der  verungluckten 
Conjecturen  des  Herrn  Prof.  Hermann,  Bonn,  1829,  8vo ;  Cramer,  Anecd.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  366- 
388,  Oxon.,  1838,  &c.  3  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  23,  seqq. 

*  Plut.,  De  Mus.,  xxviii. ;  Clem.  Alex.,  Strom.,  p.  308,  &o. 


86 


GREEK     LITERATURE, 


whole  amount  of  change  in  the  mechanical  structure  of  the  measure. 
The  Iambic,  on  the  other  hand,  bears,  perhaps  above  all  other  metres,  in 
its  very  essence,  the  stamp  of  popular  origin.  It  is,  as  Aristotle  and 
other  ancient  critics  have  pointedly  remarked,  the  metre  of  familiar  dis 
course.1  Hence,  as  the  same  critics  observe,  the  frequency  of  its  spon 
taneous  occurrence  in  prose  compositions,  the  justice  of  which  remark 
may  be  easily  verified  by  the  test  of  experiment.  The  iambic  measure, 
therefore,  suggested  itself  instinctively  to  primitive  genius,  in  any  attempt 
to  impart  to  the  poetical  treatment  of  a  subject,  not  so  much  dignity  or 
solemnity,-  as  emphatic  pungency  and  smartness. 

III.  In  its  further  cultivation,  however,  iambic  verse,  or,  rather,  the 
iambic  trimeter,  for  in  that  form  alone  is  its  full  excellence  displayed, 
not  only  embraces,  like  the  elegy,  the  treatment  of  every  variety  of  sub 
ject,  but  as  possessing,  in  a  degree  little  short  of  the  hexameter,  the 
principle  of  continuity,  which  is  wanting  in  the  elegy,  is  qualified  to  treat 
those  subjects  with  similar,  if  not  the  same  ease,  amplitude,  and  dignity 
as  the  hexameter  itself.     The  perfection  of  iambic  versification  is  the 
text  of  Aristophanes,  where  it  will  ever  remain  unsurpassed  and  unrival 
led  in  variety  and  brilliancy  of  dramatic  effect. 

IV.  We  will  now  proceed  to  give  a  brief  sketch  of  the  lives  and  works 
of  the  most  eminent  among  the  early  iambic  poets  of  Greece. 

1.  ARCHILOCHUS  ('Apxlhoxos),  of  whom  some  mention  has  already  been 
made  under  the  head  of  elegiac  verse,  but  whose  fuller  biography  belongs 
more  properly  to  this  place,  was  descended  from  a  noble  family  who  held 
the  priesthood  in  the  island  of  Paros.  His  father  was  Telesicles,  and  his 
mother  a  slave  named  Enipo.  He  flourished  about  714-676  B.C.  In 
the  flower  of  his  age,  between  710  and  700  B.C.,  and  probably  after  he 
had  gained  a  prize  for  his  hymn  to  Ceres,2  he  went  from  Paros  to  Tha 
sos,  with  a  colony,  of  which  one  account  makes  him  the  leader.  The 
motive  for  the  emigration  can  only  be  conjectured.  It  was  most  proba 
bly  the  result  of  a  political  change,  to  which  cause  was  added,  in  the 
case  of  Archilochus,  a  sense  of  personal  wrongs.  He  had  been  a  suitor 
to  Neobule,  one  of  the  daughters  of  Lycambes,  who  first  promised  and 
afterward  refused  to  give  his  daughter  to  the  poet.  Enraged  at  this 
treatment,  Archilochus  attacked  the  whole  family  in  an  iambic  poem,  ac 
cusing  Lycambes  of  perjury,  and  his  daughters  of  the  most  abandoned 
lives.  The  verses  were  recited  at  the  festival  of  Ceres,  and  produced 
such  an  effect  that  the  daughters  of  Lycambes  are  said  to  have  hung 
themselves  through  shame. 

The  bitterness,  moreover,  which  he  expressed  in  his  poems  toward  his 
native  island  seems  to  have  arisen,  in  part,  from  the  low  estimation  in 
which  he  was  held,  as  being  the  son  of  a  slave.  Neither  was  he  more 
happy  at  Thasos.  He  draws  the  most  melancholy  picture  of  his  adopted 
country,  which  he  at  length  quitted  in  disgust.3  While  at  Thasos,  he 
incurred  the  disgrace  of  losing  his  shield  in  an  engagement  with  the 
Thracians  of  the  opposite  continent ;  but,  like  Alcaeus,  under  similar  cir- 

1  Arist.,  Rhet.,  iii.,  1  ;  Poet.,  xxiv.  2  Schol.  in  Aristoph.,  Av.,  1762. 

1  Ptuf.,  DP  E.ml.,  12.  p.  r>(>4  ;  Mrab.,  xiv  ,  n.  f>4R ,  viij.,  p.  370,  *r. 


POETIC  A  L     PERIOD.  87 

cumstances,  instead  of  being  ashamed  of  the  disaster,  he  recorded  it  in 
his  verse.  Plutarch  states1  that  Archilochus  was  banished  from  Sparta 
the  very  hour  that  he  had  arrived  there,  because  he  had  written  in  his 
poems  that  a  man  had  better  throw  away  his  arms  than  lose  his  life. 
But  Valerius  Maximus  says  that  the  poems  of  Archilochus  were  forbid 
den  at  Sparta  because  of  their  licentiousness,  and  especially  on  account 
of  the  attack  on  the  daughters  of  Lycambes.2 

The  fact  that  the  fame  of  Archilochus  was  spread  in  his  lifetime  over 
the  whole  of  Greece,  together  with  his  unsettled  character,  render  it 
probable  that  he  made  many  journeys  of  which  we  have  no  account.  It 
seems  that  he  visited  Siris,  in  Lower  Italy,  the  only  city  of  which  he 
speaks  well.3  At  length  he  returned  to  Paros,  and  in  a  war  between  the 
Parians  and  the  people  of  Naxos,  he  fell  by  the  hand  of  a  Naxian  named 
Calondas,  or  Corax. 

Of  the  merits  of  Archilochus  in  elegiac  verse  we  have  already  spoken. 
His  fame,  however,  principally  rested  on  his  satiric  iambic  poetry,  the 
first  place  in  which  was  awarded  to  him  by  the  consent  of  the  ancient 
writers,  who  did  not  hesitate  to  compare  him  with  Sophocles,  Pindar, 
and  even  Homer ;  meaning,  doubtless,  that,  as  they  stood  at  the  head  of 
tragic,  lyric,  and  epic  poetry  respectively,  so  was  Archilochus  the  first 
of  iambic  satirical  writers  ;  while  some  place  him  next  to  Homer,  above 
all  other  poets.*  The  Emperor  Hadrian  judged  that  the  Muses  had  shown 
a  special  mark  of  favor  to  Homer  in  leading  Archilochus  into  a  different 
department  of  poetry.  The  Iambics  of  Archilochus  expressed  the  stron 
gest  feelings  in  the  most  unmeasured  language.  The  license  of  Ionian 
democracy,  and  the  bitterness  of  a  disappointed  man,  were  united  with 
the  highest  degree  of  poetical  power  to  give  them  force  and  point.  In 
countries  and  ages  unfamiliar  with  the  political  and  religious  license 
which  at  once  incited  and  protected  the  poet,  his  satire  was  blamed  for 
its  severity ;  and  the  emotion  accounted  most  conspicuous  in  his  verses 
was  "rage,"  as  we  see  in  the  line  of  Horace,5  "  Archiloclmm  proprio  rabies 
armavit  iambo,"  and  in  the  expression  of  Hadrian,  Awo-ftWas  Id/jLfiovs,  and 
his  bitterness  passed  into  a  proverb,  'Apx'ihoxov  Trare'is. 

But  there  must  have  been  something  more  than  mere  sarcastic  pow 
er  ;  there  must  have  been  truth  and  delicate  wit  in  the  sarcasms  of  the 
poet,  whom  Plato  does  not  hesitate  to  call  the  "  very  wise"  (rov  o-ofpurd- 
Tou).6  Quintilian  also  ascribes  to  him  the  greatest  power  of  expression, 
displayed  in  sentences  sometimes  strong,  sometimes  brief,  with  rapid 
changes  (quum  valida,  turn  Irevcs  vibrantesque  scntcntia),  the  greatest  life 
and  nervousness  (plurimum  vita,  atquc  ncrvorum),  and  considers  that  what 
ever  blame  his  works  deserve  is  the  fault  of  his  subjects,  and  not  of  his 
genius.7  In  the  latter  opinion  the  Greek  critics  seem  to  have  joined.8 
The  best  opportunity  we  have  of  judging  of  the  structure  of  Archilochus's 
poetry,  though  not  of  its  satiric  character,  is  furnished  by  the  Epodes  of 

i  Inst.  Lacon.,  p.  239,  b.  *  Val.  Max.,  vi.,  3,  ext.  1.          3  Athen.,  xii.,  p.  523,  d. 

*  Dion  Chrysost.,  Orat.  33,  vol.  ii.,  p.  5;  Longin.,  xiii.,  3;  Veil.  Paterc.,  i.,  5;  Cic., 
Orat.,  2,  &c.  »  EP.  ad  Pis.,  79  6  Plat.,  Rcpub.,  ii.,  p.  365. 

7  Quint.,  x.,  1,  CO.  s  piut.,  De  Aud^  i3>  p.  45)  n 


88 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


Horace,  as  we  learn  from  that  poet  himself.     Some  manifest  translations 
of  Archilochus  may  be  seen  in  the  Epodes. 

The  fragments  of  Archilochus  are  collected  in  Jacobs'  Anthologia  Grce- 
ca,  Gaisford's  Poetce  Gr&ci  Minores,  Bergk's  Poetce  Lyrici  Greed,  and  by 
Liebel,  in  his  Archilochi  Reliquia,  Lips.,  1812,  8vo  (3d  edit.,  Vienna,  1819). 

2.  SIMONIDES  (Stjuwj/t's^s)  of  Samos,  or,  as  he  is  more  usually  designa 
ted,  of  Amorgos,  has  already,  like  Archilochus,  been  briefly  alluded  to 
under  the  head  of  the  elegiac  poets.     He  was  the  second,  both  in  time 
and  reputation,  of  the  three  principal  iambic  poets  of  the  early  period  of 
Greek  literature,  namely,  Archilochus,  Simonides,  and  Hipponax.1     He 
was  a  native  of  Samos,  whence  he  led  a  colony  to  the  neighboring  island 
of  Amorgos,  where  he  founded  three  cities,  Minoa,  JEgialus,  and  Arcesi- 
ne,  in  the  first  of  which  he  fixed  his  own  abode.2    He  flourished  about 
B.C.  664.     The  iambic  poems  of  Simonides  were  of  two  species,  gnomic 
and  satirical ;  and  he  is  remarkable  for  the  peculiar  application  which 
he  made  of  the  iambic  metre  ;  that  is  to  say,  he  took  not  individuals,  but 
whole  classes  of  persons  as  the  object  of  his  satire.    The  most  important 
of  his  extant  fragments  is  a  satire  upon  women,  in  which  he  derives  the 
various,  though  generally  bad  qualities  of  women  from  the  variety  of 
their  origin ;  thus,  the  uncleanly  woman  is  derived  from  the  swine  ;  the 
cunning  woman  from  the  fox,  the  talkative  woman  from  the  dog,  and  so 
on.     There  is  only  one  race  created  for  the  benefit  of  men,  the  woman 
sprung  from  the  bee,  who  is  fond  of  her  work,  and  keeps  faithful  watch 
over  her  house.3 

The  fragments  of  Simonides  of  Amorgos  have  been  edited,  intermixed 
with  those  of  Simonides  of  Ceos,  and  almost  without  an  attempt  to  dis 
tinguish  them,  in  the  chief  collections  of  the  Greek  poets  ;  in  Brunck's 
Analecta,  and  in  Jacobs'  Anthologia  Grceca.  There  is  an  edition  of  the 
fragment  on  women  by  Koeler,  with  a  prefatory  epistle  by  Heyne,  Get 
ting.,  1781,  8vo.  But  the  first  complete  edition  was  that  of  Welcker, 
published  in  the  Rheinisches  Museum  for  1835,  2d  series,  vol.  iii.,  p.  353, 
seqq.,  and  also  separately,  under  the  title  of  Simonidis  Amorgini  Iambi 
qui  supersunt,  Bonn.,  1835,  8vo.  The  text  of  the  fragments  is  also  con 
tained  in  Schneidewin's  Delectus  Poesis  Grcecorum,  and  in  Bergk's  Poeta 
Lyrici  Gr<zci. 

3.  SOLON  (2cto.o>i/)  of  Athens  has  been  already  mentioned,  like  the  pre 
ceding,  under  the  head  of  elegiac  poets.     After  Solon  had  introduced  his 
new  constitution,  he  soon  found  that,  although  he  had  attempted  to  sat 
isfy  the  claims  of  all  parties,  or,  rather,  to  give  to  each  party  and  order  its 
due  share  of  power,  he  had  not  succeeded  in  satisfying  any.     In  order  to 
shame  his  opponents,  he  wrote  some  iambics,  in  which  he  calls  on  his 
censors  to  consider  of  how  many  citizens  the  state  would  have  been  be 
reaved,  if  he  had  listened  to  the  demands  of  the  contending  factions.    As 
a  witness  of  the  goodness  of  his  plans,  Solon  calls  the  great  goddess 
Earth,  the  mother  of  Saturn,  whose  surface  had  before  this  time  been 

1  Proclus,  Cturr.stom.,  7  ;  Lucian.,  PseudoL,  2. 

2  Compare  Strab.,  x.,  p.  487 ;  Steph.  Byz.,  s.  v.  ' 

3  Muller,  Hist.  Or.  Lit.,  p.  140. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 

covered  with  numerous  boundary-stones,  in  sign  of  the  ground's  being 
mortgaged ;  these  he  had  succeeded  in  removing,  and  in  restoring  the 
land  in  full  property  to  the  mortgagers.  This  fragment  is  well  worth 
reading,  since  it  gives  as  clear  an  idea  of  the  political  situation  of  Athens 
at  the  time  as  it  does  of  Solon's  iambic  style.  It  shows  a  truly  Attic  en 
ergy  and  address  in  defending  a  favorite  cause,  while  it  contains  the  first 
germs  of  that  power  of  speech  which  afterward  came  to  maturity  in  the 
dialogue  of  the  Athenian  stage,  and  in  the  oratory  of  the  popular  assem 
bly  and  of  the  courts  of  justice.  In  the  dialect  and  expressions,  the  po 
etry  of  Solon  retains  more  of  the  Ionic  cast.1  The  editions  of  the  frag 
ments  of  Solon  have  already  been  mentioned  on  page  76. 

4.  HIPPONAX  ('lTnruva£),  a  native  of  Ephesus,  was,  after  Archilochus 
and  Simonides,  the  third  of  the  classical  iambic  poets  of  Greece.  He 
flourished  B.C.  546-520.  Like  others  of  the  early  poets,  Hipponax  was 
distinguished  for  his  love  of  liberty.  The  tyrants  of  his  native  city  hav 
ing  expelled  him  from  his  home,  he  took  up  his  abode  at  Clazomenffi,  for 
which  reason  he  is  sometimes  called  a  Clazomenian.2  He  lived  at  the 
latter  place  in  great  poverty,  and,  according  to  one  account,  died  of  want. 
In  person  Hipponax  was  little,  thin,  and  ugly,  but  very  strong.3  The  two 
brothers  Bupalus  and  Athenis,  who  were  sculptors  of  Chios,  made  statues 
of  Hipponax,  in  which  they  caricatured  his  natural  ugliness,  and  he,  in  re 
turn,  directed  all  the  power  of  his  satirical  poetry  against  them,  and  espe 
cially  against  Bupalus.*  Later  writers  add  that  the  sculptors  hanged  them 
selves  in  despair.  This,  however,  is  probably  a  mere  attempt  to  improve 
upon  the  resemblance  between  the  stories  of  Archilochus  and  Hipponax, 
since  Pliny  contradicts  the  account  of  the  suicide  of  Bupalus  by  referring 
to  works  of  his  which  were  executed  at  a  later  period.  As  for  the  frag 
ment  of  Hipponax,5  Tn  KAafo/xe'i/owi  Bo&raAos  KaTeKTeidev,  if  it  really  be  his 
(for  it  is  only  quoted  anonymously  by  Rufinus),6  instead  of  being  consid 
ered  a  proof  of  the  story,  it  should  more  probably  be  regarded  as  having 
formed,  through  a  too  literal  interpretation,  one  source  of  the  error. 

The  satire  of  Hipponax,  however,  was  not  concentrated  entirely  on 
certain  individuals ;  from  existing  fragments  it  appears  rather  to  have 
been  founded  on  a  general  view  of  life,  taken,  however,  on  its  ridiculous 
or  grotesque  side.  He  severely  chastised  the  luxury  of  his  Ionian  breth 
ren  ;  he  did  not  spare  his  own  parents  ;  and  he  ventured  even  to  ridicule 
the  gods.  His  language  is  filled  with  words  taken  from  common  life, 
such  as  the  names  of  articles  of  food,  clothing,  and  of  ordinary  utensils 
current  among  the  working  people.  He  evidently  strives  to  make  his 
iambics  local  pictures  full  of  freshness,  nature,  and  homely  truth.  For 
this  purpose,  the  change  which  Hipponax  devised  in  the  iambic  metre  was 
as  felicitous  as  it  was  bold  ;  he  crippled  the  rapid  agile  gait  of  the  iambic, 
by  transforming  the  last  foot  from  a  pure  iambus  to  a  spondee,  contrary 

Milller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  140,  seq.  2  Sulpicia,  Sat.,  v.,  6. 

Athen.,  xii.,  p.  552,  c,  d;  jElian,  V.  H.,  x.,  6. 

Plin.,  H.  N.,  xxxvi.,  5,  4 ;  Horat.,  Epod.,  vi.,  14  ;  Liician.,  PseudoL,  2. 

Frag,  vi.,  p.  29,  Welcker,  where  Bergk  gives  *12  KAafofxeVioi,  BoumxAos  re  Ka0rj»>ts. 

p.  2712,  Putsch,. 


90  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

to  the  fundamentai  principle  of  the  whole  mode  of  versification.  The 
metre  thus  maimed  and  stripped  of  its  beauty  and  regularity,  afid  tech 
nically  made  &pf>vd/j.os,  was  a  perfectly  appropriate  rhythmical  form  for 
the  delineation  of  such  pictures  of  intellectual  deformity  as  Hipponax 
delighted  in.  As  this  new  species  of  verse  had  hence  a  sort  of  halting 
movement,  it  obtained  the  name  of  Chbliamlus  (xwhia.ij.p6s),  "  lame  iam 
bic,"  or  Iambus  Scazon  (3fo/*j8os  cr/cc^u*/),  "  limping  iambic."  Iambics  of  this 
kind  are  still  more  cumbrous  and  halting  when  the  fifth  foot  is  also  a  spon 
dee  ;  which,  indeed,  according  to  the  original  structure,  is  not  forbidden. 
These  last  were  called  Ischiorrhogic,  "  broken-backed"  (IffxiopfxayLKoi),  and 
were  invented  by  another  iambographer  named  Ananius.  They  are  very 
rarely  used  by  Hipponax.  The  choliambics  of  Hipponax  were  imitated 
by  many  later  writers  ;  among  others  by  Babrius,  whose  Fables  are  com 
posed  entirely  in  this  metre.1 

Hipponax  wrote  also  a  parody  on  the  Iliad.  He  may  be  said  to  occupy 
a  middle  place  between  Archilochus  and  Aristophanes.  He  is  as  bitter, 
but  not  so  earnest  as  the  former,  while,  in  lightness  and  jocoseness,  he 
more  resembles  the  latter.  There  are  still  extant  about  a  hundred  lines 
of  his  poems  which  are  collected  by  Welcker  (Hipponactis  et  Ananii  lam- 
bographorum  Fragmenta,  Getting.,  1817,  4to),  Bergk  (Foeta  Lyrici  Gr&ci), 
Schneidewin  (Delectus  Poesis  Gracorum},  and  by  Meineke,  in  Lachmann's 
edition  of  Babrius,  Berol.,  1845. 

5.  ANANIUS  ('Ai/chnos),  a  Greek  iambic  poet,  contemporary  with  Hippo 
nax,  flourished  about  540  B.C.  He  is  generally  regarded  as  the  inventor 
of  ischiorrhogic  iambics,  of  which  we  have  just  made  mention.  Ananius 
has  hardly  any  individual  character  in  literary  history  distinct  from  that 
of  Hipponax.  In  Alexandrea  their  poems  seem  to  have  been  regarded  as 
forming  one  collection ;  and  thus  the  criterion  by  which  to  determine 
whether  a  particular  passage  belonged  to  the  one  or  the  other  was  often 
lost,  or  never  existed.  Hence,  in  the  uncertainty  which  is  the  true  au 
thor,  the  same  verse  is  occasionally  ascribed  to  both.2  The  few  fragments 
which  are  attributed  with  certainty  to  Ananius  are  so  completely  in  the 
tone  of  Hipponax,  that  it  would  be  a  vain  labor  to  attempt  to  point  out 
any  characteristic  difference.  These  fragments  appear  with  those  of 
Hipponax  in  the  edition  of  Welcker,  and  in  the  collections  mentioned  in 
the  previous  article.3 

FABLE    AND    PARODY.4 

V.  Akin  to  the  Iambic  are  two  kinds  of  poetry,  which,  though  differing 
widely  from  each  other,  have  both  their  source  in  the  turn  for  the  delin 
eation  of  the  ludicrous,  and  both  stand  in  a  close  historical  relation  to  the 
iambic :   1.  FABLE,  originally  called  afros,  and  afterward,  less  precisely, 
fj.v0os  and  \6yos  -,  and,  2.  PARODY. 

VI.  With  regard  to  Fable,  it  is  not  improbable  that  in  other  countries, 
particularly  in  the  north  of  Europe,  it  may  have  arisen  from  a  child-like, 
playful  view  of  the  character  and  habits  of  animals,  which  frequently  sug- 

1  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  142 ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.        2  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  625,  c. 
3  Muller,  p.  143 ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Muller,  I.  c. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 


91 


gest  a  comparison  with  the  nature  and  incidents  of  human  life.  In  Greece, 
however,  it  originated  in  an  intentional  travestie  of  human  affairs.  The 
alyos  is,  as  its  name  denotes,  an  admonition,  or  rather  a  reproof,  veiled, 
either  from  fear  of  an  excess  of  frankness,  or  from  love  of  fun  and  jest, 
beneath  the  fiction  of  an  occurrence  happening  among  beasts.  Such  is 
the  character  of  the  alvos  at  its  very  first  appearance  in  Hesiod.1  Archil- 
ochus  employed  the  alvos  in  a  similar  manner  in  his  iambics  against  Ly- 
cambes.2  In  like  manner  Stesichorus  cautioned  his  countrymen,  the  Hi- 
meraeans,  against  Phalaris,  by  the  fable  of  the  horse,  who,  to  revenge  him 
self  on  the  stag,  took  the  man  on  his  back,  and  thus  became  his  slave.8 

VII.  It  is  prebable  that  the  taste  for  fables  of  beasts,  and  numerous 
similar  inventions,  found  their  way  into  Greece  from  the  East,  since  this 
sort  of  symbolical  and  veiled  narrative  is  more  in  harmony  with  the  Ori 
ental  than  with  the  Greek  character.     Indeed,  the  very  names  given  by 
the  Greeks  contain  a  distinct  avowal  of  this.     Thus,  one  kind  of  fable 
was  called  the  Libyan,  which  we  may,  therefore,  infer  was  of  African 
origin,  and  was  introduced  into  Greece  through  Cyrene.     To  this  class 
belongs,  according  to  ^Eschylus,  the  beautiful  fable  of  the  wounded  eagle, 
who,  looking  at  the  feathering  of  the  arrow  with  which  he  was  pierced, 
exclaimed,  "  I  perish  by  feathers  drawn  from  my  own  wing."*    From  this 
example,  we  see  that  the  Libyan  fable  belonged  to  the  class  of  fables  of 
animals.     So  also  did  the  sorts  to  which  later  teachers  of  rhetoric  give 
the  names  of  the  Cyprian  and  the  Cilician.     The  contest  between  the 
olive  and  the  bay,  on  Mount  Tmolus,  is  cited  as  a  fable  of  the  ancient 
Lydians.5 

VIII.  The  Carian  stories  or  fables,  however,  were  taken  from  human 
life,  as,  for  instance,  that  quoted  by  the  Greek  lyric  poets,  Timocreon  and 
Simonides.     A  Carian  fisherman,  in  the  winter,  sees  a  sea-polypus,  and 
he  says  to  himself,  "  If  I  dive  to  catch  it,  I  shall  be  frozen  to  death ;  if  I 
don't  catch  it,  my  children  must  starve."6     The  Sybaritic  fables,  men 
tioned  by  Aristophanes,  have  a  similar  character.7     Both  the  Sybaritic 
and  JSsopian  fables  are  represented  by  Aristophanes  as  jests  or  ludicrous 
stories  (j€\o7a).     As  regards  ^Esop  himself,  Bentley  has  shown  that  he 
was  very  far  from  being  regarded  by  the  Greeks  as  one  of  their  poets,  and 
still  less  as  a  writer.    They  considered  him  merely  an  ingenious  fabulist, 
under  whose  name  a  number  of  fables,  often  applicable  to  human  affairs, 
were  current,  and  to  whom,  at  a  later  period,  nearly  all  that  were  either 
invented  or  derived  from  any  other  source  were  attributed.     His  history 
has  been  dressed  out  by  the  later  Greeks  with  all  manner  of  droll  and 
whimsical  incidents.     What  can  be  collected  from  the  ancient  writers 
down  to  Aristotle  is,  however,  confined  to  the  following  : 

IX.  ^Esop  (AfcrwTros)  was  a  slave  of  the  Samian  ladmon,  who  lived  in 
the  time  of  the  Egyptian  king  Amasis,  the  reign  of  which  monarch  begins 
B.C.  5G9.     According  to  the  statement  of  Eugeon,  an  old  Samian  his 
torian,  he  was  a  native  of  the  Thracian  city  of  Mesembria,  which  existed 

1  Op.  et  D.,  v.  202,  seqq.  2  Frag,  xxxviii.,  Gaisf.  3  Arist.,  Rhet.,  ii.,  20. 

*  Frag.  Myrmid.  5  Frag,  xciii.,  Bentl. 

6  Walz,  Rhet.  Gr.,  vol.  ii..  p.  11.  7  Aristoph.,  Vesp.,  1259,  1427,  1437. 


92  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

long  before  it  was  peopled  by  a  colony  of  Byzantines  in  the  reign  of  Darius. 
According  to  a  less  authentic  account,  he  was  from  Cotyaeum,  in  Phrygia. 
It  seems  that  his  wit  and  pleasantry  procured  him  his  freedom ;  for, 
though  he  remained  in  ladmon's  family,  it  must  have  been  as  a  freedman, 
or  he  could  not,  as  Aristotle  relates,  have  appeared  publicly  as  the  de 
fender  of  a  demagogue,  on  which  occasion  he  told  a  fable  in  support  of 
his  client.  It  is  generally  received  as  certain  that  ^Esop  perished  at 
Delphi ;  the  Delphians,  exasperated  by  his  sarcastic  fables,  having  put 
him  to  death  on  a  charge  of  robbing  the  temple.1  The  fables  now  extant 
in  prose,  bearing  the  name  of  yEsop,  are  unquestionably  spurious.  Of 
these  there  are  three  principal  collections,  the  one  containing  136  fables, 
published  first  A.D.  1610,  from  MSS.,  at  Heidelberg.  This  is  so  clumsy 
a  forgery,  that  it  mentions  the  orator  Demades,  who  lived  200  years  after 
^Esop,  and  contains  a  whole  sentence  from  the  book  of  Job.  Some  of 
the  passages  Bentley  has  shown  to  be  fragments  of  choliambic  verses, 
and  has  made  it  tolerably  certain  that  they  were  stolen  from  Babrius. 
The  second  collection  was  made  by  Maximus  Planudes,  the  monk  of  Con 
stantinople,  living  in  the  fourteenth  century.  The  third  collection  was 
found  in  a  MS.  at  Florence,  and  published  in  1809.  Its  date  is  about  a 
century  before  the  time  of  Planudes.2 

The  two  best  editions  of  ^Esop  are,  that  of  De  Furia,  containing  the 
new  fables  from  the  Florentine  MS.,  Florent.,  1809,  8vo,  reprinted  at 
Leipsic,  and  also  by  Coray,  at  Paris,  in  the  following  year ;  and  that  of 
Schneider,  Breslau,  1810,  8vo. 

X.  Attempts  were  probably  made  at  an  early  period  to  give  a  poetical 
form  to  the  .'Esopian  fable.  Socrates  is  said  to  have  thus  beguiled  his 
imprisonment.  Demetrius  Phalereus,  following  his  example  (B.C.  320), 
turned  ^sop's  fables  into  verse,  and  collected  them  in  a  book  ;  and,  after 
him,  an  author  whose  name  is  unknown,  published  them  in  elegiacs,  of 
which  some  fragments  are  preserved  by  Suidas.  But  the  only  Greek 
versifier  of  ^Esop,  of  whose  writings  any  whole  fables  are  preserved,  is 
BABRIUS  (Bdppios),  called  also  BABRIAS  (Bafipias),  and  sometimes  GABRIAS 
(Tappias),  an  author  of  no  mean  powers,  and  who  may  well  take  his  place 
among  fabulists  with  Phaedrus  and  Lafontaine.  He  lived,  in  all  proba 
bility,  a  little  before  the  age  of  Augustus,  and  made  his  version  in  choli- 
ambics.  This  version  consisted  of  ten  books,  of  which  only  a  few  frag 
ments  were  known  until  within  a  few  years,  when  a  manuscript,  contain 
ing  123  fables,  was  discovered  on  Mount  Athos.  Later  writers  of  ^Eso- 
pean  fables,  such  as  Maximus  Planudes,  probably  turned  the  poems  of 
Babrius  into  prose,  but  they  did  it  in  so  clumsy  a  manner,  that  many 
choliambic  verses  may  still  be  traced  in  their  fables,  as  Bentley  has  shown 
in  his  Dissertation  on  the  Fables  of  ^Esop,3  and  as  Tyrwhitt  has  proved 
still  more  clearly.*  The  latest  editions  of  Babrius  are,  that  of  Boisson- 
ade,  Paris,  1844,  8vo ;  in  which  the  newly -discovered  fables  first  ap- 

i  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  146.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Appended  to  the  Dissertation  on  the  Epistles  of  Phalaris. 

4  "  De  Babrio,  Fabularum  JEsopearum  Scriptore,"  Lond.,  177G,  reprinted  at  Erlangen, 
1785,  ed.  Harles. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  93 

peared ;  that  of  Lachmann,  Berol.,  1845 ;  of  Orelli  and  Baiter,  Turic., 
1845  ;  and  of  Lewis,  Lond.,  1847. 

XI.  The  other  kind  of  poetry  to  which  we  referred  was  Parody  (irapw- 
S/a).  This  was  understood  by  the  ancients,  as  it  is  by  ourselves,  to  mean 
an  adoption  of  the  form  of  some  celebrated  poem,  with  such  changes  in 
the  matter  as  to  produce  a  totally  different  effect ;  and  generally  to  sub 
stitute  mean  and  ridiculous  for  elevated  poetical  sentiments.  This  con 
trast  between  the  grand  and  sublime  images  suggested  to  the  memory, 
and  the  comic  ones  introduced  in  their  stead,  renders  parody  peculiarly 
fitted  to  place  any  subject  in  a  ludicrous,  grotesque,  and  trivial  light.  The 
purpose  of  it,  however,  was  not,  in  general,  to  detract  from  the  reverence 
due  to  the  ancient  poet  (who,  in  most  instances,  was  Homer)  by  this  trav 
esty,  but  only  to  add  zest  and  pungency  to  the  satire.1 


CHAPTER  XVI. 
SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 

LYRIC   POETR Y — continued. 

CONNECTION     OF     LYRIC     POETRY     WITH     MUSIC.2 

I.  IN  the  Elegiac  and  Iambic  styles  of  poetry,  the  former  suited  to  the 
expression  of  grief,  the  latter  to  the  expression  of  anger,  hatred,  and  con 
tempt,  Greek  poetry  entered  the  domain  of  real  life.     Still,  however,  a 
great  variety  of  new  forms  of  poetry  was  reserved  for  the  invention  of 
future  poets.     The  ele^y  and  the  iambic  versification  contained  the  germs 
of  the  lyric  style,  but  Jie  principal  characteristic  of  lyric  poetry,  strictly 
so  called,  was  its  connection  with  music,  vocal  as  well  as  instrumental. 
This  connection,  indeed,  existed,  to  a  certain  extent,  in  epic,  and  still 
more  in  elegiac  and  iambic  poetry  ;  but  singing  was  not  essential  in  those 
styles.     Such  a  recitation  by  a  rhapsodist,  as  was  usual  for  epic  poetry, 
also  served,  at  least  in  the  beginning,  for  elegiac,  and  in  great  part  for 
iambic  verses. 

II.  Singing,  however,  and  a  continued  instrumental  accompaniment,  are 
appropriate  where  the  expression  of  feeling  or  passion  is  inconsistent  with 
a  more  measured  and  equable  mode  of  recitation.     Moreover,  as  the  ex 
pression  of  strong  feeling  required  more  pauses  and  resting-places,  the 
verses  in  lyric  poetry,  strictly  so  called,  naturally  fell  into  strophes  of  great 
er  or  less  length,  each  of  which  comprised  several  varieties  of  metre,  and 
admitted  of  an  appropriate  termination.    This  arrangement  of  the  strophes 
was,  at  the  same  time,  connected  with  dancing,  which  was  naturally, 
though  not  necessarily,  associated  with  lyric  poetry  in  this  its  stricter 
sense. 

III.  The  Greek  lyric  poetry,  therefore,  in  the  stricter  sense  in  which 
we  are  now  considering  it,  was  characterized  by  the  expression  of  deeper 
and  more  impassioned  feeling,  and  a  more  swelling  and  impetuous  tone, 

i  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  146.  2  Ib.,  p.  149. 


REEK     LITERATURE. 

than  the  elegiac  or  iambic  metre  ;  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  effect  was 
heightened  by  appropriate  vocal  and  instrumental  music,  and  often  by  the 
novements  and  figures  of  the  dance.  In  this  union  of  the  sister  arts,  po 
etry  was  indeed  predominant,  and  music  and  dancing  were  only  employed 
to  enforce  and  elevate  the  conceptions  of  the  higher  art.  Yet  music  in 
its  turn  exercised  a  reciprocal  influence  on  poetry ;  so  that,  as  it  became 
more  cultivated,  the  choice  of  the  musical  measure  decided  the  tone  of 
the  whole  poem. 

IV.  In  order,  therefore,  that  the  character  of  the  Greek  lyric  poetry, 
strictly  so  called,  may  be  more  clearly  understood,  some  account  must  be 
given  of  early  Grecian  music.     Not,  indeed,  a  technical  analysis  of  the 
art,  which  would  be  here  quite  out  of  place,  but  some  remarks  merely  on 
its  elementary  history,  in  connection  with  brief  sketches  of  the  history 
of  the  primitive  improvers  of  Greek  musical  science. 

V.  The  mythical  traditions  respecting  Orpheus,  Philammon,  Chryso- 
themis,  and  other  minstrels  of  the  early  times,  being  set  aside,  the  his 
tory  of  Greek  music  begins  with  TERPANDER,  the  Lesbian,1  who  appears 
to  have  been  properly  the  founder  of  it.     He  first  reduced  to  rule  the 
different  modes  of  singing  which  prevailed  in  different  countries,  and 
formed  out  of  these  rude  strains  a  connected  system,  from  which  the 
Greek  music  never  departed  throughout  all  the  improvements  and  refine 
ments  of  later  ages.     It  is  probable  that  Terpander  belonged  to  a  family 
who  derived  their  practice  of  music  from  the  ancient  Pierian  bards  of 
Bceotia.     The  ^Eolians  of  Lesbos  had  their  origin  in  Boeotia,  the  country 
to  which  the  worship  of  the  muses  and  the  Thracian  hymns  belonged  ; 
and  they  probably  brought  with  them  the  first  rudiments  of  poetry.     This 
migration  of  the  art  of  the  muses  is  ingeniously  expressed  by  the  le 
gend,  that,  after  the  murder  of  Orpheus  by  the  Thracian  Msenads,  his  head 
and  lyre  were  thrown  into  the  sea,  and  borne  upon  its  waves  to  Lesbos, 
whence  singing  and  the  music  of  the  cithara  flourished  in  this  the  most 
musical  of  islands.     The  grave  supposed  to  contain  the  head  of  Orpheus 
was  shown  in  Antissa,  a  small  town  of  Lesbos  t2  and  it  was  thought 
that  in  that  spot  the  nightingales  sang  most  sweetly.     In  Antissa,  also, 
according  to  the  testimony  of  several  ancient  writers,  Terpander  was 
born.     In  this  way,  the  domestic  impressions  and  the  occupations  of  his 
youth  may  have  prepared  Terpander  for  the  great  undertaking  which  he 
afterward  performed. 

According  to  the  best  opinion,  Terpander  flourished  between  B.C.  700 
and  650.  Of  his  early  life  in  Lesbos  nothing  is  known.  We  find  him 
subsequently  removing  from  Lesbos  to  Sparta,  where  he  introduced  his 
new  system  of  music,  and  established  the  first  musical  school  or  system 
(Kardo-raffis)  that  existed  in  Greece.3  Terpander's  connection  with  Lace- 
daemon  is  said  to  have  originated  in  an  invitation  by  the  Spartan  rulers  to 
visit  their  city  during  a  period  of  intestine  discord.  This  step  was  taken 
by  them  in  obedience  to  an  injunction  of  the  Delphic  priestess,  by  whom 
the  Lesbian  musician  had  been  pointed  out  as  the  destined  means  of  rec- 

1  Pind.  ap.  Athen.,  xiv.,p.  635,  d;  Pint.,  De  Mus.,  30,  p.  1141,  c;  Suid.,  s.  v. 

2  Steph.  Byz.,  s.  r.  "Avno-o-a.  3  p/M,.    Mns    9         J]34 


P  O  E  T  I  C  A  L     P  E  R  I  O  D.  95 

onciling  the  hostile  factions.  Such  is  said  to  have  been  the  effect  of  his 
music  on  the  Spartans,  that  the  contending  parties,  dissolved  in  tears,  em 
braced  each  other,  and  buried  all  previous  differences  in  oblivion.1  Fix 
ing  his  abode  in  that  city,  he  fulfilled,  during  the  remainder  of  his  life,  the 
functions  of  state  poet  and  musician  amid  universal  admiration  and 
esteem.  After  his  death  his  memory  was  revered,  and  his  compositions 
were  regarded  as  models  to  all  succeeding  professors  of  citharoedic  art. 
His  system  continued  to  nourish  up  to  the  time  of  his  countryman  Phry- 
nis,  whose  innovations,  about  the  period  of  the  Persian  war,  were  regarded 
as  corruptions  of  the  genuine  Hellenic  music.3 

Great  as  was  Terpander's  fame,  however,  as  an  original  genius,  his 
merits  would  yet  appear,  from  the  more  authentic  notices,  to  have  con 
sisted  less  in  actual  discovery  than  in  the  adaptation,  to  Greek  tastes  and 
habits,  of  refinements  of  art  already  familiar  to  the  cultivated  nations  of 
Asia.  The  most  celebrated  novelty  for  which  he  obtained  credit  was  the 
invention  of  the  seven-stringed  lyre,3  by  the  addition  of  three  chords  to 
the  old  tetrachord  instrument.  This,  however,  can  not  be  considered,  nor 
has  it  been  so  understood  by  the  more  critical  even  of  his  own  country 
men,  as  indicating  the  first  actual  construction  of  a  stringed  instrument 
with  the  compass  of  an  octave.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  more 
civilized  nations  of  Asia  possessed,  before  his  time,  instruments  of  equal 
or  greater  compass ;  and  Terpander  is  stated,  on  no  less  authority  than 
that  of  Pindar,  to  have  founded  his  improvements  of  the  Greek  cithara  on 
a  Lydian  instrument  of  two  octaves,  called  a  magadis,  which,  under  the 
Greek  name  of  injurls  or  fiappiroi',  he  had  also  the  merit  (though  this  some 
modern  critics  doubt)  of  first  introducing  into  Europe.4 

Terpander  is  also  the  accredited  inventor  of  the  art  of  writing  music  ;B 
and  there  can  be  little  doubt  of  his  having  possessed  a  system  of  notation, 
forming  the  basis  of  that  still  in  use.  Here  again,  however,  his  services 
are  probably  to  be  understood  rather  in  the  way  of  adaptation  to  native 
Greek  practice  than  of  original  discovery.  Plutarch  tells  us  that  he  set 
his  own  verses  and  those  of  Homer  to  certain  citharcedic  nomes,  and  sang 
them  in  the  musical  contests  ;  and  that  he  was  the  first  who  gave  names 
to  the  various  citharcedic  nomes.  These  nomes  were  simple  tunes,  from 
which  others  could  be  derived  by  slight  variations  ;  and  these  latter  were 
called  n&r).  That  the  nomes  of  Terpander  were  entirely  of  his  own  com 
position  is  not  very  probable,  and,  indeed,  there  is  evidence  to  prove  that 
some  of  them  were  derived  from  old  tunes,  ascribed  to  the  ancient  bards, 
and  others  from  national  melodies.  The  remains  of  Terpander's  poetry, 
which  no  doubt  consisted  entirely  of  religious  hymns,  consist  of  a  few 
fragments,  contained  in  the  collections  of  Bergk  and  Schneidewin. 

VI.  Another  ancient  master,  the  Phrygian  OLYMPUS,  so  much  enlarged 
the  system  of  the  Greek  music,  that  Plutarch  considers  him,  and  not 
Terpander,  to  have  been  the  founder  of  it.  The  date,  and,  indeed,  the 
whole  history  of  this  Olympus,  are  involved  in  obscurity,  by  a  confusion 

i  Mure,  Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  39.  2  Id.  ib. 

3  Frag.  Terpandri,  1,  ap.  Schneidewin.,  Del.  Poes.  Gr.,  p.  237. 

4  Bockh,  De  Metr.  Find.,  p.  201  ;  Frag.  Find.,  \\.  •  Mure,  p.  41.        6  Plut.,  Mus.t  3. 


96 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


between  him  (who  is  certainly  as  historical  as  Terpander)  and  a  mytho 
logical  Olympus,  who  is  connected  with  the  first  founders  of  the  Phrygian 
religion  and  worship.  Even  Plutarch,  who,  in  his  learned  treatise  upon 
music,  has  marked  the  distinction  between  the  earlier  and  the  later  Olym 
pus,  has  still  attributed  inventions  to  the  fabulous  Olympus  which  prop 
erly  belong  to  the  historical  one.  The  ancient  Olympus  is  quite  lost  in 
the  dawn  of  mythical  legends ;  he  is  the  favorite  and  disciple  of  the 
Phrygian  Silenus,  Marsyas,  who  invented  the  flute,  and  used  it  in  his 
unfortunate  contest  with  the  cithara  of  the  Hellenic  god  Apollo.1 

The  later  Olympus,  whom  we  are  here  considering,  was  a  Phrygian, 
and  perhaps  belonged  to  a  family  of  native  musicians,  since  he  was  said 
to  be  descended  from  the  first  Olympus.  He  is  placed  by  Plutarch  at  the 
head  of  auletic  music,  as  Terpander  stood  at  the  head  of  the  citharoedic ; 
and,  on  account  of  his  inventions  in  the  art,  Plutarch  even  assigns  to  him, 
rather  than  to  Terpander,  the  honor  of  being  the  father  of  Greek  music, 
as  we  have  already  remarked  (apx-nybs  rrjs  'EAA^/CTJ*  /cai  /caA^  HOWL^S)* 
With  respect  to  his  age,  Miiller  places  him,  for  satisfactory  reasons,  after 
Terpander  and  before  Thaletas,  that  is,  between  the  30th  and  40th  Olym 
piads,  B.C.  660-620.  Though  a  Phrygian  by  origin,  Olympus  must  be 
reckoned  among  the  Greek  musicians,  for  all  the  accounts  make  Greece 
the  scene,  of  his  artistic  activity,  and  his  subjects  Greek ;  and  he  had 
Greek  disciples,  such  as  Crates  and  Hierax.3  He  may,  in  fact,  be  con 
sidered  as  having  naturalized  in  Greece  the  music  of  the  flute,  which  had 
previously  been  almost  peculiar  to  Phrygia. 

Of  the  particular  tunes  (v6p.oi)  ascribed  to  him,  the  most  important  was 
the  'Apfj.dreios  v6/j.os,  a  mournful  and  passionate  strain,  of  the  rhythm  of 
which  we  are  able  to  form  an  idea  from  a  passage  in  the  Orestes  of  Eu 
ripides,  which  was  set  to  it,  as  the  passage  itself  tells  us.  A  dirge  also, 
in  honor  of  the  slain  Python,  was  said  to  have  been  played  by  Olympus, 
at  Delphi,  and  in  the  Lydian  style.  Olympus  was  a  great  inventor  in 
rhythm  as  well  as  in  music.  To  the  two  existing  species  of  rhythm,  the 
Iffov,  in  which  the  arsis  and  thesis  are  equal  (as  in  the  dactyl  and  anapeest), 
and  the  Srn-Aao-ioj',  in  which  the  arsis  is  twice  the  length  of  the  thesis  (as 
in  the  iambus  and  trochee),  he  added  a  third,  the  rj/j.i6\io^  in  which  the 
length  of  the  arsis  is  equal  to  two  short  syllables,  and  that  of  the  thesis  to 
three,  as  in  the  Cretic  (-*-  ^  — ),  the  Paeons  (-^-  ^  ^  ^,  &c.),  and  the 

Bacchius  (--  -!• ).     There  is  no  mention  of  any  poems  composed  by 

Olympus.4 

VII.  THALETAS  (QaA^ras),  or  THALES  (®a\rjs),  marks  the  third  epoch  in 
the  history  of  Greek  music.  A  native  of  Crete,  he  found  means  to  ex 
press  in  a  musical  form  the  spirit  which  pervaded  the  religious  institu 
tions  of  his  country,  by  which  he  produced  a  strong  impression  upon  the 
other  Greeks.  He  seems  to  have  been  partly  a  priest  and  partly  an  art 
ist  ;  and  from  this  circumstance  his  history  is  veiled  in  obscurity.  He  is 
called  a  Gortynian,  but  is  also  said  to  have  been  born  in  Cnossus  or 

1  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  156.  2  Plut.,  Mus.,  p.  1133,  e;  1135,  c. 

3  Id.  ib.,  p.  1133,  P.;  1140,  d;  Poll.,  iv.,  79.  *  Smith,  Diet  Eiogr.,  s.  v. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  97 

Elyrus.1  In  compliance,  according  to  tradition,  with  an  invitation  which 
the  Spartans  sent  to  him  in  obedience  to  an  oracle,  he  removed  to  Spar 
ta,  where,  by  the  sacred  character  of  his  paeans,  and  the  influence  of  his 
music,  he  appeased  the  wrath  of  Apollo,  who  had  visited  the  city  with  a 
plague,  and  he  composed  the  factions  of  the  citizens,  who  were  at  enmity 
with  one  another.2  He  introduced  from  Crete  certain  principles  or  ele 
ments  of  music  and  rhythm  which  did  not  exist  in  Terpander's  system, 
and  thereby  founded  the  second  of  the  musical  schools  which  flourished 
at  Sparta.  The  date  of  Thaletas  is  uncertain ;  he  seems  to  have  flour 
ished  about  B.C.  670  or  660,  and  how  much  before  or  after  these  dates 
can  not  be  determined.  It  appears  not  unlikely  that  he  was  already  dis 
tinguished  in  Crete,  while  Terpander  flourished  at  Sparta.  We  have  no 
remains  of  his  poetry.  Plutarch  and  other  writers  speak  of  him  as  a 
lyric  poet,  and  Suidas  mentions,  as  his  works,  jue'A??  and  Tror^uara  riva  jicu- 

6lKd. 

VIII.  Terpander,  Olympus,  and  Thaletas  are  distinguished  by  the  sali 
ent  peculiarities  which  belong  to  inventive  genius.  But  it  is  difficult  to 
find  any  individual  characteristics  in  the  numerous  masters  who  followed 
them  between  the  40th  and  50th  Olympiads.  By  the  efforts  of  these 
masters,  however,  music  appears  to  have  been  brought  to  the  degree  of 
excellence  at  which  we  find  it  in  the  time  of  Pindar.3 


CHAPTER  XVII. 
SECOND   OR   POETICAL   PERIOD  —  continued. 

LYRIC    POETR Y — continued. 

SCHOOLS  OF  LYRIC  POETR  Y,4  ET  C.  . 

I.  THE  Lyric  Poetry  proper  of  the  Greeks,  or  Lyric  poetry  in  the  stricter 
sense  of  the  term,  is  of  two  kinds,  which  were  cultivated  by  different 
schools  of  poets,  the  name  which  is  commonly  given  to  poets  living  in  the 
same  country,  and  following  the  same  rules  of  composition.     Of  these 
two  schools  one  is  called  the  Molic,  the  other  the  Doric. 

II.  The  Molic  school  is  so  called  because  it  flourished  among  the  JEo- 
lians  of  Asia  Minor,  and  particularly  in  the  island  of  Lesbos.     The  Doric 
school  was  so  called  because,  though  it  was  diffused  over  the  whole  of 
Greece,  yet  it  was  first  and  principally  cultivated  by  the  Dorians  in  the 
Peloponnesus  and  Sicily.     The  difference  of  origin  appears  also  in  the 
dialects  of  these  two  schools.     The  Lesbian  school  wrote  in  the  Molic 
dialect,  as  it  is  still  to  be  found  in  inscriptions  in  that  island,  while  the 
Doric  employed  almost  indifferently  either  a  mitigated  Dorism  or  the  epic 
dialect,  the  dignity  and  solemnity  of  which  was  heightened  by  a  limited 
use  of  Doric  forms. 

III.  These  two  schools  differ  essentially  in  every  respect,  as  much  in 
the  subject  as  in  the  form  and  style  of  their  poems.     To  begin  with  the 

1  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Mutter,  p.  159.  2  Pausan.,  i.,  14,  4 ;  Pint.,  Lycurg.,  4. 

3  Milller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  161.  *  Mutter,  p.  164. 


$3  (-T  R  E  E  K     LITERATURE. 

mode  of  recitation :  the  Doric  lyric  poetry  was  intended  to  be  executed 
by  choruses,  and  to  be  sung  to  choral  dances,  whence  it  is  sometimes 
called  choral  poetry.  On  the  other  hand,  the  yEolic  is  never  called  cho 
ral,  because  it  was  meant  to  be  recited  by  a  single  person,  who  accom 
panied  his  recitation  with  a  stringed  instrument,  generally  the  lyre,  and 
with  suitable  gestures.  The  structure  of  the  Doric  lyric  strophe  is  com 
prehensive,  and  often  very  artificial,  inasmuch  as  the  ear,  which  might 
perhaps  be  unable  to  detect  the  recurring  rhythms,  was  assisted  by  the 
eye,  which  could  follow  the  different  movements  of  the  chorus  ;  and  thus 
the  spectator  was  able  to  understand  the  intricate  and  artificial  plan  of 
the  composition.  The  Molic  lyric  poetry,  on  the  other  hand,  was  much 
more  limited,  and  either  consisted  of  verses  joined  together,  or  else  it 
formed,  of  a  few  short  verses,  strophes  in  which  the  same  verse  is  fre 
quently  repeated,  and  the  conclusion  is  effected  by  a  change  in  the  versi 
fication,  or  by  the  addition  of  a  short  final  verse. 

IV.  The  strophes  of  the  Doric  lyric  poetry  were  also  often  combined, 
by  annexing  to  two  strophes  corresponding  with  one  another  (the  first 
technically  called  strophe,  and  the  second  antistrophe)  a  third  and  different 
one,  called  cpode.     The  origin  of  this  (according  to  the  ancients)  is  that 
the  chorus,  having  performed  one  movement  during  the  strophe,  returned 
to  their  former  position  during  the  antistrophe,  and  then  remained  mo 
tionless  for  a  time,  during  which  the  epode  is  sung.     The  short  strophes 
of  the  JEolic  lyric  poetry,  on  the  other  hand,  follow  each  other  in  equal 
measure,  and  without  being  interrupted  by  epodes.     The  ^Eolic  strophe 
is  sometimes  called,  for  distinction'  sake,  the  Melic  strophe ;  the  Dorian, 
in  like  manner,  the  Choric  strophe. 

V.  It  must  not  be  inferred,  however,  from  what  is  here  stated,  that 
poems  for  choral  exhibition  were  never  composed  by  the  JEolic  poets ; 
for  choruses  were  undoubtedly  performed  in  Lesbos,  as  well  as  in  other 
parts  of  Greece.     Several  of  the  Lesbian  lyric  poems,  of  which  we  have 
fragments  and  accounts,  appear  to  have  been  composed  for  choral  reci 
tation.     But  the  characteristic  excellence  of  this  lyric  poetry  was  the  ex 
pression  of  individual  ideas  and  sentiments  with  warmth  and  frankness. 
These  sentiments  formed  a  natural  expression  in  the  native  dialect  of 
these  poets,  the  ancient  ^Eolic,  which  has  a  character  of  simplicity  and 
fondness ;  the  epic  dialect,  the  general  language  of  Greek  poetry,  being 
only  used  sparingly,  in  order  to  soften  and  elevate  this  popular  dialect. 
Unhappily,  the  works  of  these  poets  were  allowed  to  perish  at  a  time 
when  they  had  become  unintelligible  from  the  singularity  of  their  dialect, 
and  the  condensation  of  their  thoughts.     To  this  cause,  and  not  to  the 
warmth  of  their  erotic  descriptions,  is  to  be  attributed  the  oblivion  to 
which  they  were  consigned.     For  if  literary  works  had  been  condemned 
on  moral  grounds  of  this  kind,  the  writings  of  Martial  and  Petronius,  and 
many  poems  of  the  Anthology,  would  not  now  exist,  while  Alcaeus  and 
Sappho  would  probably  be  extant.1 

VI.  Before  entering,  however,  upon  the  biographies  of  the  poets  be 
longing  to  the  two  schools  which  we  have  just  been  considering,  it  will 

1  Miillfr,  p.  1«6. 


P  O  E  T I  C  A  L     P  E  R  I  O  D.  yjj 

be  proper  to  give  a  brief  sketch  of  the  orders  and  occasions  of  lyric  per 
formances,  more  particularly  as  many  terms  connected  with  these  will 
occur  in  the  course  of  those  biographies,  which  it  will  be  less  convenient 
then  to  explain. 

ORDERS  AND  OCCASIONS  OF  LYRIC  PERFORMANCE.1 

VII.  The  various  modes  of  adapting  lyric  poetry  to  those  festive  rites, 
public  or  private,  with  which  its  higher  cultivation  was  so  vitally  con 
nected,  have  special  claims  on  our  attention,  since  they  supply  one  of  the 
most  striking  illustrations  of  the  fertile  genius  and  discriminating  taste 
of  the  Greek  nation.     From  Olympus  down  to  the  work-shop  or  the  sheep- 
fold,  from  Jove  and  Apollo  to  the  wandering  mendicant,  every  rank  and 
degree  of  the  Greek  community,  divine  or  human,  had  its  own  proper  al 
lotment  of  poetical  celebration.     The  gods  had  their  hymns,  names,  pceans, 
and  dithyrambs;  great  men  their  encomia  and  epinicia;  the  votaries  of 
pleasure  their  erotica  and  symposiaca ;  the  mourner  his  threnodia  and  ele 
gies  ;  the  vine-dresser  his  epilenia ;  the  herdsmen  their  bucolica ;  even  the 
beggar  his  eiresione  and  chelidonisma.     The  number  of  these  varieties  of 
Grecian  song  recorded  under  distinct  titles,  and  most  of  them  enjoying  a 
certain  benefit  of  scientific  culture,  amounts  to  upward  of  fifty.2 

VIII.  A  portion,  indeed,  of  this  number  no  longer  exist  but  in  name ; 
and,  with  the  exception  of  those  immediately  connected  with  the  great 
public  festivals,  few  have  been  described  with  such  precision,  or  are  so 
clearly  illustrated  by  existing  specimens,  as  to  supply  materials  for  treat 
ment  as  distinct  heads  of  subject.     Those  which  in  this  more  tangible 
capacity  chiefly  claim  attention  are  the  following  :  the  Hymn,  Nome,  Paan, 
Hyporchem,  Prosodium,  Parthenia,  Dithyramb,  Threnus,  Symposiaca,  Enco 
mia,  Epinicia,  Erotica,  Gamelia,  Embateria.     This  catalogue  may  be  ranged 
under  two  general  heads,  of  Sacred,  and  Profane  or  Secular  :3  the  former 
comprising  poems  in  exclusive  honor  of  the  gods ;  the  latter,  those  de 
voted,  in  whole  or  in  part,  to  human  concerns  or  interests.     To  the  for 
mer  head  belong  the  hymn,  nome,  paean,  hyporchem,  prosodium,  dithy 
ramb  ;  to  the  latter,  the  symposiaca,  encomia,  epinicia,  erotica,  gamelia, 
embateria.     As  an  intermediate  class,  partaking  of  both  characters,  may 
be  ranked  the  threnus  and  parthenia.    We  will  now  proceed  to  offer  a  brief 
account  of  each,  with  the  exception  of  the  paean,  of  which  we  have  al 
ready  treated. 

IX.  The  first  two  names  in  the  above  list,  Hymn  and  Nome,  are  rather 
generic  terms  applicable  to  every  more  dignified  species  of  lyric  composi 
tions,  than  designations  of  any  particular  class  of  ode.     The  psean,  for  ex 
ample,  was  the  hymn  of  rejoicing  or  triumph  ;  the  prosodium,  the  proces 
sional  hymn  ;  the  procemium,  the  introductory  hymn  to  the  sacred  office 
in  the  sanctuary.     In  later  times,  however,  the  title  Hymn  appears  to 
have  attached,  in  a  peculiar  sense,  to  the  odes  sung  by  the  chorus  during 
the  sacrifice,  when  stationary  around  the  altar.     Nome  (v6^os\  in  its  orig- 

1  Mure,  Hist.  Grit.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  63,  seqq. 

2  Compare  Ilgen,  Scolia  sive  Carmina  convivialia  Grose.,  p.  xiv.,  teqq. 

3  Proclus,  Chrestom.,  ed.  Gaisf.,  p.  380,  seq. 


100 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


inal  more  comprehensive  signification,  denoted  simply  that  more  definite 
adaptation  of  musical  to  poetic  numbers,  which  forms  the  essence  of  all 
lyric  composition,  as  distinct  from  the  continuous  chant  or  recitative  of 
the  old  epic  minstrelsy.  In  the  more  advanced  stages  of  lyric  art,  how 
ever,  the  term  is  restricted,  in  a  proper  sense,  to  a  certain  more  solemn 
order  of  hymn  or  anthem,  the  older  specimens  of  which  were  marked  by 
a  peculiar  simplicity  and  dignity  of  style,  and  passed  generally  current  as 
productions  of  the  earliest  and  purest  periods  of  lyric  art.1 

X.  The  term  Hyporchem  (vTr6pxrj/j.a)  denotes,  in  familiar  usage,  both  a 
lively  kind  of  mimic  dance,  and  the  branch  of  lyric  composition  by  which 
that  dance  was  accompanied.2    The  musical  or  poetical  element  of  the 
hyporchem,  from  the  earliest  period  of  its  cultivation,  appears  in  style  and 
numbers  to  have  closely  resembled  the  paean.     Both  performances  were 
;onnected  preferably,  during  their  best  period,  with  the  worship  of  Apollo ; 

and  a  favorite  measure  of  both  was  the  Cretic  or  paeonic.  Much  similar 
ity  is,  accordingly,  observable  between  existing  specimens  of  each  order 
of  composition ;  and  among  the  ancient  critics  themselves  it  was  often 
matter  of  doubt  under  which  denomination  an  ode  was  to  be  ranked.3  The 
main  difference  seems  to  have  been,  that  the  psean  was  characterized 
by  a  pervading  dignity  and  propriety,  the  hyporchem  by  a  greater  degree 
of  vivacity/tending  at  times  to  levity  or  license.4  Another  feature  of  dis 
tinction  was  the  greater  prevalence  in  the  hyporchem,  when  combined 
with  dancing,  of  that  mimetic  action  which  entered  more  or  less  into  all 
such  solemnities  among  the  Greeks.  A  third  distinction  was,  that  the 
paean,  during  the  best  ages,  was  exclusively  addressed  to  the  gods,  where 
as  hyporchems  appear  to  have  been,  though  rarely,  composed  and  per 
formed  in  honor  of  men.5  The  first  poet  to  whom  hyporchems  are  ascribed 
was  Thaletas.  In  the  fragments  of  the  hyporchems  of  Pindar,  the  rhythms 
are  peculiarly  light,  and  have  a  very  imitative  and  graphic  character.6 
These  characteristics  must  have  existed  in  a  much  higher  degree  in  the 
hyporchematic  songs  of  Thaletas.7  The  chief  recorded  author  of  hy- 
porchematic  productions  during  the  earlier  period,  besides  Thaletas,  was 
Xenodamus  of  Cythera.  But  no  remains  of  the  works  of  either  of  them 
have  been  preserved.  The  extant  specimens  of  the  immediately  succeed 
ing  period  emanate  from  its  most  celebrated  poets,  Simonides,  Pindar, 
Pratinas,  and  Bacchylides,  with  several  of  whom  the  hyporchem  was  a 
favorite  style.8 

XI.  The  Prosodium  (irpos6?>Lov,  soil.  /j.f\os)  was  the  hymn  sung  by  the 
choristers  in  their  procession  to  the  altar  or  sanctuary.     Although  this 
order  of  composition  must  have  been  connected  with  the  service  of  every 
deity  of  whose  rites  processional  movements  formed  a  part,  its  early  cul 
ture  and  chief  popularity  were  concentrated  around  the  worship  of  Apollo. 
The  prosodium,  accordingly,  is  classed  under  the  general  head  of  Paean, 

Plat.,  De  Leg.,  p.  700 ;  Proclus,  Chrestom.,  ed.  Gaisf.,  p.  383. 

Proclus,  p.  384,  Gaisf.  3  Pint.,  Mus.,  9.     Compare  Bcckh,  De  Metr.  Find.,  p  201. 

See  a  hyporchem  of  Pratinas,  ap.  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  617. 

Bockh,  Frag.  Find.,  p.  596,  seq.  6  Bockh,  De  Metr.  Pind.,  p.  201,  seqq. ;  p.  270. 

M'&Urr,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  p.  23,  seqq.     Compare  p.  100,  seqq.         s  Mure,  Crit.  Hint.,  p.  72. 


POETICAL    PFIUOD.,  101 

by  the  special  title  of  Prosodiac,  or  Processional, 'paean.  Like  the  kindred 
order  of  sacred  odes,  the  nome  and  paean  proper,  it  was  composed,  in  the 
earlier  epochs  of  its  cultivation,  in  hexameter  measure.  Afterward,  how 
ever,  when  the  lyric  school  of  art  acquired  the  ascendant,  arid  the  dance 
became  popular  even  in  these  graver  processional  solemnities,  lyric  num 
bers  were  exclusively  preferred.  The  prosodia  of  Pindar,  the  oldest  of 
which  any  considerable  remains  have  been  preserved,  are  chiefly  in  the 
same  grave  Dorian  measure  as  the  greater  part  of  his  epinician  odes.  The 
accompaniment  of  the  flute,  as  usual  in  festive  movements,  was  preferred 
to  that  of  the  harp,  customary  in  the  stationary  choral  rites.1 

XII.  To  the  head  of  Prosodia  belongs  in  part  the  order  of  composition 
entitled  Parthenia,2  or  "virginal  songs."     This  title,  however,  comprises 
two  different  kinds  of  ode  :  first,  processional  or  sacrificial  songs,  sung, 
as  their  name  denotes,  by  virgins,  in  honor  of  certain  deities  ;  secondly, 
songs  in  honor  of  those  same  youthful  members  of  the  female  sex.3     The 
parthenia  of  the  first  class  may,  therefore,  be  characterized  as  sacred  ; 
those  of  the  second  as  profane  or  secular.     The  sacred  parthenia  were 
substantially  hymns,  paeans,  or  prosodia,  as  the  object  or  occasion  might 
require.     Their  distinctive  feature  was  a  blending  of  feminine  grace  and 
tenderness  with  devotional  solemnity.*    Hence  may  be  explained  the 
great  popularity  of  this  style  of  composition  with  most  of  the  leading  lyric 
poets  from  Alcman  downward.5 

XIII.  The  Dithyramb  (8idvpa/j.pos),  which  comes  next  in  order,  is  a  cel 
ebrated  branch  of  composition,  and,  as  the  parent  of  the  Attic  tragedy, 
assumes  a  still  greater  degree  of  importance  and  interest,  than  would 
even  otherwise  justly  attach  to  it  on  account  of  its  great  popularity,  and 
its  extensive  influence  on  the  style  and  taste  of  every  period  of  Greek 
poetical  literature.     The  dithyramb,  in  its  earliest  form,  was  the  hymn 
of  Bacchus,6  as  the  paean  was  the  hymn  of  Apollo.     Its  character  was  al 
ways,  like  that  of  the  worship  to  wilich  it  belonged,  impassioned  and  en 
thusiastic  ;  the  extremes  of  feeling,  rapturous  pleasure  and  wild  lamenta 
tion,  were  both  expressed  by  it.     The  existing  notices  of  this  order  of 
composition  are  of  comparatively  recent  date  ;  nor,  indeed,  is  there  any 
allusion  by  Homer,  Hesiod,  or  other  primitive  authorities,  to  the  festive 
rites  of  Bacchus  as  popular  in  their  day.     That  the  dithyramb,  however, 
in  its  simpler  melic  form  of  Dionysiac  hymn  or  paean,  was  already  a  cul 
tivated  branch  of  lyric  art  in  the  age  of  Archilochus,  appears  from  a  still 
extant  distich  of  that  poet,7  in  which  he  mentions  it  by  name  as  the  "  beau 
tiful  song  of  Dionysus,"  and  prides  himself  on  his  skill  in  its  execution. 
These  verses  are  in  a  lively  vein  of  trochaic  tetrameter,  the  same  meas 
ure  which  Aristotle  describes  as  originally  proper  to  the  dithyramb  ;  and 
they  may  hence  be  presumed  to  have  been  themselves  the  exordium  of 
a  dithyrambic  ode  or  chorus.     In  the  generation  subsequent  to  Archilo 
chus,  a  more  extended  and  artificial  character  was  imparted  to  this  branch 

1  Pint.,  Mus.,  18 ;  Mure,  p.  74.  2  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  631. 

3  Schol.  in  Aristoph.,Av.,  920;  Suid.,  s.v. ;  Produs,  Ckrestom.,  p.  380,  Gaisf. 

4  Jtion.  Hal.,  eel.  Rriske,  vol.  iii.,  p.  1073.     Compare  Pint.,  Miis.,  17.         5  Mure,  p.  74. 
6  Plat.,  Df  Leg.,  p.  700.  7  Frag.  72,  Bergk.     Compare  A  then.,  xiv.,  p.  628. 


102  .GREEK    LITERATURE. 

of  lyric  performance  by  Anon,  the  celebrated  Lesbian  musician,  and  by 
means  of  which  the  dithyramb  was  raised  to  a  regular  choral  song.1  But 
of  this  change  we  will  speak  more  fully  in  our  remarks  on  the  origin  of 
tragedy. 

XIV.  The  term  Threnus  (frprjvos)  denotes  in  its  origin  any  species  of 
lamentation,  more  properly  the  dirge  or  lament  for  the  death  of  kinsmen 
or  dear  friends.    In  later  usage,  the  title  became  nearly  equivalent  to  the 
more  familiar  one  of  elegy.    When  sung  over  the  corpse  at  its  laying  out 
or  entombment,  the  threnus  acquired  the  distinctive  name  of  Epicedlum 
(eTtuchSeiov),  or  funeral  song.2     The  only  two  occasions  on  which  the 
threnus  is  mentioned  by  Homer  were  of  the  latter  description.     To  the 
threnus  belongs  also  the  song  of  Linus,  which  we  have  already  considered. 
The  measure  of  the  threnus  was  probably  at  first  the  dactylic.    With  the 
advance  of  lyric  art,  however,  a  great  variety  of  metrical  forms  was  ad 
mitted.    The  repuied  author  of  the  extension  was  the  Phrygian  Olympus.3 

XV.  WTe  come  next  to  the  Symposiaca,  or  convivial  poetry  of  the  Greeks. 
Convivial  songs  were  classed  by  the  ancients  under  three  heads  :*  first, 
those  sung  in  chorus  by  the  whole  company  ;  secondly,  those  sung  by 
each  guest  in  succession  ;  thirdly,  such  as  were  sung  also  in  succession, 
but  under  certain  peculiarities  of  arrangement,  and  with  a  limitation  in 
ordinary  cases  to  the  more  gifted  members  of  the  company.     The  songs 
of  the  first  class  appear  to  have  been  chiefly  those  inaugural  odes  familiarly 
called  Paeans,  sung  as  grace  or  procemium  to  the  whole  entertainment, 
and  usually  addressed  to  Apollo,  sometimes  to  Jove,  Bacchus,  Mercury, 
or  such  other  deity  as  the  occasion  suggested.     The  next  more  varied 
order  of  symposiac  performances,  in  which  all  took  part,  though  not  all 
simultaneously,  very  much  resembles  the  modern  custom  of  laying  each 
guest  under  an  obligation  to  sing  his  song,5  whether  his  own  composition 
or  some  popular  ode  of  the  day.     On  these  occasions  a  lyre  or  myrtle 
branch,6  less  frequently  a  drinking  cup,7  was  handed  round  as  a  tempo 
rary  badge  of  office  from  guest  to  guest,  each,  in  his  turn,  receiving  it 
from  his  predecessor,  and  passing  it  on  to  his  neighbor  at  the  close  of  his 
own  part.    The  lyre  was  probably  destined  for  those  alone  who,  together 
with  a  musical  voice,  possessed  skill  in  the  use  of  the  instrument.    When 
these  qualifications,  one  or  both,  were  wanting,  the  myrtle  branch  was  pre 
ferred,  as  the  ancient  and  proper  symbol  of  the  more  simple  styles  of  po 
etic  recitation.     The  songs  thus  circulated  bore  no  distinctive  title,  but 
that  of  Paroenia  (napo'ivta,  scil.  jueAvj),  "  wine  songs,"  or  symposiaca,  "  drink 
ing  songs,"  common  to  all  those  of  the  convivial  order.8 

The  third  more  complicated  and  more  celebrated  species  of  Paroenia 
were  those  called  Scolia  (<r/coAia).  The  performance  was  here  reserved 
for  the  more  scientific  and  experienced  musicians  of  the  party.  The  chief 

1  Mure,  p.  78.  2  Proclus,  Chrestom.,  p.  385,  Gaisf. ;  Etym.  Mag.,  s.  v.  Oprivos. 

3  Mure,  p.  94,  seqq. 

4  Diccearch.  ap.  Suui.,  Hesych.  et  Phot.,  s.  v.  O-KO\LOV  ;  Plut.,  Synipos.,  i.,  1,  5. 

5  Plut.,  Sympos.,  p.  214,  scqq.     Occasionally  prose  was  substituted  for  poetry,  each 
guest  telling  a  story,  or  offering  a  short  essay  on  some  pleasant  topic.     Plut.,  I.  c. 

6  Aristoph.,  Nub.,  1358;  Schol.  ad  loc. ;  Vcsp.,  1214-1220;  KrhoL  ad  loc. ;  Plut.,  Sym 
pos.,  I.,  1.  a,  &r.  i  Athm.,  xi.,  p.  503.  s  Mure,  p.  100. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 


103 


of  the  qualified  guests  led  off  with  a  short  stave  or  sonnet,  whether  an  en- 
tire  ode  or  a  part  of  some  longer  composition,  marked  in  either  case  by 
some  lively  spirit  or  point.  He  then  handed  the  symbol  of  office  to  the 
person  who,  it  had  been  arranged,  should  follow,  or  whom  he  thought  fit 
to  select  as  his  successor,  who  passed  it  on,  in  his  turn,  to  a  third,  and  so 
on ;  each  being  expected  at  once  to  carry  on  the  strain,  whether  in  the 
way  of  continuation  or  repartee,  in  the  same  or  a  closely  congenial  style 
of  subject  or  measure.  The  notion  that  the  name  of  the  song  arose  from 
its  irregular  course  around  the  table  (ffKo\i6u,  "  crooked")  is  not  probable. 
It  is  much  more  likely  (according  to  the  opinion  of  other  ancient  writers) 
that  in  the  melody  to  which  the  scolia  were  sung  certain  liberties  and 
irregularities  were  permitted,  by  which  the  extemporaneous  execution  of 
the  song  was  facilitated  ;  and  that  on  this  account  the  song  was  said  to 
be  bent.  The  rhythms  of  the  extant  scolia  are  very  various,  though,  on 
the  whole,  they  resemble  those  of  the  JEoiic,  lyric  poetry,  only  that  the 
course  of  the  strophes  is  broken  by  an  accelerated  rhythm,  and  is  in  gen 
eral  more  animated.1 

The  Lesbians  were  the  principal  composers  of  scolia.  Terpander,  who, 
according  to  Pindar,  invented  this  kind  of  song,  was  followed  by  Alcae- 
us  and  Sappho,  and  afterward  by  Anacreon  and  Praxilla  of  sicyon,  be 
sides  many  others  celebrated  for  choral  poetry,  as  Simonides  and  Pindar. 
Among  the  preserved  scolia  are  many  of  the  more  popular  current  in  the 
best  ages  of  Greece.  Some  of  these  are  also,  as  may  be  supposed,  among 
the  most  brilliant  specimens  of  Greek  epigrammatic  or  didactic  poetry, 
and  are  constantly  quoted  and  commented  upon  as  such  by  the  leading 
critics  and  moralists  of  every  period.  Even  where  the  sense  itself  is  not 
remarkable  for  point  or  spirit,  the  structure  and  rhythm  are  usually  dis 
tinguished  by  a  certain  combination  of  emphasis  with  harmony,  and  by 
an  alternate  rapidity  in  the  flow  and  abruptness  in  the  termination  of 
the  rhythmical  clauses,  peculiar  to  these  compositions,  and  singularly 
conducive  to  that  mixture  of  elegance  and  pungency  which  it  was  clearly 
the  object  of  their  authors  to  impart  to  them. 

Although  scolia  were  mostly  composed  of  moral  maxims,  or  of  short 
invocations  to  the  gods,  or  panegyrics  on  heroes,  there  exist  two,  of 
great  length  and  interest,  the  authors  of  which  are  not  otherwise  known 
as  poets.  The  one  beginning,  "  My  great  wealth  is  my  spear  and  sword," 
and  written  by  Hybrias,  a  Cretan,  in  the  Doric  measure,  expresses  all  the 
pride  of  the  dominant  Dorian,  whose  right  rested  upon  his  arms ;  the 
other  is  the  production  of  an  Athenian  named  Callistratus,  and  was  writ 
ten  probably  not  long  after  the  Persian  war,  as  it  was  a  favorite  song  in 
the  time  of  Aristophanes.  It  celebrates  the  liberators  of  the  Athenian 
people,  Harmodius  and  Aristoglton,  for  having,  at  the  great  festival  of 
Minerva,  slain  the  tyrant  Hipparchus,  and  restored  equal  rights  to  the 
Athenians.2 

XVI.  The  term  Encomium  (tyc^/ito?,  scil.  CTTOS)  denoted  originally  the 
ode  sung  at  the  C omits  (KU/J.OS),  which  latter  term,  in  the  wider  sense, 
comprehended  every  convivial  meeting  accompanied  by  dance,  song,  jind 
i  Mulltr,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  188.  3  fd.  ib.,  p.  189. 


104  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Bacchanalian  festivity.  In  its  more  dignified  application,  however,  the 
term  Comus  denoted  a  higher  order  of.  festive  entertainment.  Such  were 
the  public  banquets  held  in  honor  of  distinguished  personages,  of  a  war 
rior  after  a  victory  or  successful  campaign,  of  a  magistrate  on  entering 
office  ;  and,  in  later  habitual  practice,  of  the  conquerors  in  the  Olympian, 
Pythian,  and  other  great  national  games.  In  every  variety  of  the  comus, 
a  main  part  of  the  ceremony  was  performed  in  the  open  air ;  it  being 
customary,  even  for  private  bands  of  revellers,  when  flushed  with  the 
pleasures  of  the  table,  to  sally  forth  with  music,  song,  and  dance,  some 
times  to  the  sound  of  the  trumpet,1  into  the  streets  and  public  thorough 
fares.2  The  term  thus  became  more  peculiarly  appropriated  to  this  latter 
part  of  the  entertainment,  which  in  its  turn  assumed  the  character  of  a 
distinct  ceremony.  Such  was  the  escort  home,  or  serenade  to  a  mis 
tress,3  or,  after  a  banquet,  to  some  favorite  guest ;  such,  in  a  nobler 
sense,  the  triumphal  procession  of  the  victorious  hero  or  chief  to  the 
temple  or  banqueting-hall ;  such,  by  a  still  wider  extension  of  the  analo 
gy,  the  deputation  or  mission  which  escorted  the  victor  in  the  national 
games  back  to  his  native  city. 

The  title  Encomium,  or  song  of  the  comus,  is  limited  in  its  classical  ac 
ceptation,  as  denoting  an  order  of  lyric  poetry,  solely,  or  chiefly  to  the 
panegyrical  odes  performed  in  the  comi  of  a  more  dignified  character.  It 
is  hence  defined  by  the  ancients  as  bearing  the  same  relation  to  the 
praises  of  men  as  the  hymn  to  those  of  the  deity.  No  work  of  this  class, 
prior  to  the  age  of  Pindar,  has  been  preserved.  The  leading  poets,  from 
Pindar  downward,  left  large  collections  of  encomia,  of  which  the  most 
celebrated  were  those  addressed  to  the  victors  in  the  national  games. 
These  are  usually  ranked  under  the  separate  head  of  Epinicia  (eVtrfom), 
or  triumphal  encomia.  No  such  distinction,  however,  seems  to  have  been 
recognized  by  their  authors.  Pindar,  in  his  frequent  appeals  to  his  own 
Epinician  odes,  avails  himself  more  frequently  of  the  phrase  Encomia, 
and  other  cognate  derivatives  of  comus,  than  of  their  proper  title.4 

XVII.  The  Erotica  (epamcd),  or  love-songs,  require  no  explanation.    The 
most  celebrated  authors  in  this  department,  during  the  period  we  are  at 
present  considering,  were  :  Alcman,  of  the  Dorian  school ;  Sappho  and 
Alcseus,  of  the  ^Eolian  or  Lesbian  ;  and  Mimnermus,  of  the  Ionian  school. 
The  erotic  odes  of  the  three  former  poets  are  almost  exclusively  of  the 
purely  melic  order,  and  in  monostrophic  forms,  that  is,  with  one  form  of 
strophe  continually  repeated.     Mimnermus  composed  solely  or  chiefly  in 
elegiac  measure.     Such  effusions,  though  called  forth  by  human  objects 
of  adoration  alone,  occasionally  in  so  far  partake  of  a  sacred  character  as 
to  assume  the  form  of  addresses  to  the  deities  whose  countenance  and 
favor  were  invoked.     Such,  for  example,  is  the  most  brilliant  of  all  love- 
songs,  the  Invocation  of  Venus,  by  Sappho.5 

XVIII.  Gamelia  (ya^Xia),  or  bridal  songs,  are  classed  under  two  hjeads  : 
first,  those  called  Hymenaa,  sung  at  the  marriage  festival ;  secondly,  the 

'  Aristot.,  De  And.,  49. 

2  Hesiod,  Scut.  Here.,  281 ;  Aristoph.,  Pint.,  1040 ;  Thesmoph.,  104,  &c. 

3  Hermesianax,  v.  38,  47,  ap.  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  598.        4  Mure,  p.  112.        »  Id.,  p.  114. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  105 

Epithalamia,  or  bed-chamber  songs,  performed  on  the  night  of  the  cere 
mony,  as  a  serenade  or  vigil,  in  front  of  the  door  or  below  the  window  of 
the  newly-wedded  couple.  The  epithalamia  are  again  subdivided  into  the 
Lulling  song-  and  the  Waking  song,1  the  former  sung  during  the  early  part 
of  the  night,  the  latter  toward  the  hour  of  rising.  These  songs,  as  may 
be  supposed,  formed,  from  a  very  early  period,  a  popular  branch  of  lyric 
composition,  whether  in  honor  of  hero  or  heroine,  living  or  dead,  real  or 
imaginary.  The  earliest-mentioned  example  is  Hesiod's  Epithalamium 
of  Peleus  and  Thetis.  Alcman2  also  availed  himself  of  this,  among  other 
modes  of  honoring  the  sex,  which  formed  the  favorite  subject  of  his  muse  ; 
and  Sappho  left  an  entire  book  of  hymenaea,3  several  of  which  seem  to 
have  partaken  of  the  dramatic  character.  In  the  metre  of  these  compo 
sitions  no  definite  rule  is  observable.  Hesiod,  it  need  scarcely  be  re 
marked,  uses  the  hexameter;  Sappho  occasionally  employs  the  same 
measure,  in  addition  to  her  own  favorite  combinations  of  more  purely 
melic  rhythm.  The  hexameter  is  also  preferred  by  Theocritus.  The  in 
vocations,  "  O  Hymen  !  O  Hymenaeus  !"  addressed  to  the  patron  deity  of 
the  rite,  were  habitually  introduced,  as  a  sort  of  burden  or  epode,  in  all 
these  varieties  of  metrical  arrangement.4 

XIX.  Under  the  general  head  of  Embateria  (^Parlipia,  soil.  ,ueA?7)  may 
be  distinguished  two  kinds  of  military  music  ;  the  first  comprising  every 
species  of  ode  or  song  adapted,  on  ordinary  festive  occasions,  to  inspire 
or  maintain  warlike  enthusiasm  ;  the  second  may  be  defined  as  war  mu 
sic  in  the  narrower  sense,  marches,  charges,  &c.  In  Homer  mention  is 
made  of  the  first  kind  alone.  The  celebration  of  the  exploits  of  the  heroes 
of  the  olden  time  is  described  as  a  favorite  recreation  of  the  Homeric 
warriors.  To  the  first  kind  also  belong  the  elegiac  odes  of  Callinus,  and 
most  of  those  of  Tyrtaeus.  The  latter  were  sung,  consistently  with  Spar 
tan  usage,  at  the  meals  of  the  soldiers,  after  the  ordinary  convivial  paean, 
sometimes  in  chorus,  sometimes  by  single  performers  in  competition,  the 
victor  receiving  as  his  prize  from  the  polemarch  an  extra  ration  of  butch 
er-meat.5  They  were  also  chanted  in  chorus  before  the  tent-door  of  the 
king  or  commander-in-chief.6 

The  military  music  of  the  second  kind  was  little  cultivated,  ev«i  in 
historical  times,  except  among  the  Spartans.  Their  paean  embaterius,  or 
hymn  invoking  the  god  of  war,  or  other  patron  deities,  commenced  imme 
diately  after  the  order  to  advance,  and  continued  during  the  charge  and 
assault.  The  air  was  called  the  Castorean  melody,7  after  the  Tyndarid 
Castor,  one  of  the  popular  martial  demigods  of  Sparta,  and  was  accom 
panied  by  wind  instruments,  disposed  in  different  parts  of  the  line.  Its 
character  was  impressive,  rather  than  wild  or  turbulent ;  the  object  being, 
in  unison  with  the  genius  of  Spartan  warfare,  to  inspire  steady  determin 
ation,  rather  than  furious  ardor  for  the  attack.  The  measure  preferred 
was  the  anapaestic,  as  the  most  natural  march  time,  and  peculiarly  ex- 

1  Schol.  ad  Theocrit.  Id.,  xviii.  ;  Prod,  Chrest.,  p.  385,  Gaisf. 

2  Welcker,  Prof,  ad  Fragm.,  p.  iii.  3  Sapph,,  Frag,  xxxvi.,  seqq.,  Gaisf. 
4  Mure,  p.  116.                   s  Philoch.  ap.  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  630.  «  Mure,  p.  117. 
7  Pint .,  Lycurg.,  22 ,  De  Mus,,  26  ;  Schol.  in  Pind.  Pyth  ,  ii  ,  127.  seqq. 


106  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

pressive  in  its  cadence  of  stern,  energetic  resolution.  The  custom  of  at 
tacking  in  regular  march-step,  to  the  sound  of  music,  is  frequently  noticed 
by  the  ancients  as  a  peculiarity  of  Spartan  discipline  -,1  nor  is  there  any 
allusion  to  the  same  practice  in  any  other  Grecian  state,  with  the  partial 
exception  of  the  kindred  Dorian  republics  of  Crete.3 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

SECOND  OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 

LYRIC    POETR Y — continued. 

POETS     OF     THE     ^EOLIC     SCHOOL. 

I.  ALC^EUS  CAAJCCUOS)  of  Mytilene,  in  the  island  of  Lesbos,  the  earliest  of 
the  ^Eolian  lyric  poets,  began  to  flourish  about  B.C.  611.  He  belonged  to 
a  noble  family,  and  a  great  part  of  his  public  life  was  employed  in  assert 
ing  the  privileges  of  his  order.  These  privileges  were  then  endangered 
by  democratic  factions,  which  appear  to  have  placed  ambitious  men  at 
their  head,  and  to  have  given  them  powerful  support.  A  tyrant  of  this 
kind  in  Mytilene  was  Melanchrus,  who  was  opposed  by  the  brothers  of 
Alcseus,  Antimenidas  and  Cicis,  in  conjunction  with  Pittacus,  the  wisest 
statesman  of  the  time  in  Lesbos,  and  was  slain  by  them  B.C.  612. 3  At 
this  time  the  Mytileneans  were  at  war  with  foreign  enemies,  the  Atheni 
ans,  who  had  conquered  and  retained  possession  of  Sigaeum,  a  maritime 
town  of  Troas.  The  Mytileneans,  among  whom  was  Alcaeus,  were  de 
feated,  and  the  poet  incurred  the  disgrace  of  leaving  his  arms  behind 
on  the  field  of  battle ;  these  arms  were  hung  up  as  a  trophy  by  the  Athe 
nians  in  the  temple  of  Minerva,  at  Sigaeum.4  His  sending  home  the  news 
of  this  disaster,  in  a  poem  addressed  to  his  friend  Melanippus,5  seems  to 
show  that  he  had  a  reputation  for  courage  such  as  a  single  disaster  could 
not  endanger ;  and,  accordingly,  we  find  him  spoken  of  by  ancient  writers 
as  a  brave  and  skillful  warrior.6 

Alcaeus  afterward  appears  as  an  adherent  of  the  aristocratic  or  consti 
tutional  party,  in  the  resistance  offered  by  them  to  the  attempts  made  by 
a  new  series  of  demagogues.  The  most  formidable  of  these  leaders  was 
Myrsilus,  whose  death  the  poet  celebrates  in  a  still  extant  passage  of  his 
works.  In  the  sequel  of  the  same  political  vicissitudes,  Alcaeus  and  his 
brothers  appear  in  their  turn  as  usurpers,  or  disturbers  of  the  repose  of 
the  state.  They  were  expelled,  in  consequence,  by  their  old  ally  Pitta 
cus,  the  only  stanch  and  disinterested  patriot,  it  would  seem,  among 
these  political  chiefs,  and  who  was  supported  by  the  mass  of  the  better 
disposed  citizens.  At  last,  as  the  most  effectual  stop  to  these  disastrous 


1  Thucyd.,  v.,  70  ;  Polyb.,  iv.,  20  ;  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  626,  630,  F,  &c. 

2  HeracL,  Polit.,  iii. ;  Athen.,  xii.,  p.  517,  A;  Mure,  p.  119. 

3  Diog.  Laert.,  i.,  74,  79 ;  Strab.,  xiii.,  p.  617. 

*  Herod.,  v.,  95  ;  Pint.,  De  Herod.  Malig.,  s.  15,  p.  858 ;  Strab.,  xiii.,  p.  599,  seq. 

5  Frag.  56,  p.  438,  Blomf. 

e  Anthol.  Palat.,  ix.,  184  ;  Cic.,  Tusc.,  iv.,  33  ;  Hor.,  Carm.,  i.,  32,  6,  &c. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  107 

•cries  of  civil  broils,  the  same  Pittacus  was  elected  by  the  unanimous 
voice  of  the  people,  as  Alcaeus  himself  admits,  to  the  dignity  entitled 
among  the  JEolians  alo-v/j.vf)Tr)s,  or  constitutional  chief,  with  dictatorial 
powers,  for  the  preservation  of  the  laws  and  liberty  of  the  state.  This 
measure  is  said  to  have  been  chiefly  directed  against  the  machinations  of 
Alcaeus  and  the  other  malcontents.1 

The  poet's  muse,  following  the  bent  of  his  passions,  was  speedily  di 
rected  against  Pittacus,  with  an  animosity  as  fervid  as  the  zeal  with 
which  the  cause  of  that  patriot  had  formerly  been  lauded  and  supported. 
Imputed  failings  were  now  described  in  terms  of  vituperation  expressly 
invented  for  the  purpose,  such  as  Archilochus  himself  might  not  have  been 
ashamed  to  employ  in  his  most  withering  iambic  sallies.  This  is  one  of 
the  worst  features  in  the  character  or  history  of  Alcaeus;  the  moderation 
of  Pittacus,  and  the  purity  of  his  motives,  being  admitted  and  eulogized 
by  every  impartial  authority.  But  the  hostility  of  Alcseus  was  not  con 
fined  to  words.  In  an  armed  attempt  to  re-establish  their  influence,  his 
party  was  defeated,  and  himself  made  prisoner ;  when  his  generous  ad 
versary  restored  him  to  liberty.2  His  ultimate  fate  is  unknown.  By 
some  authorities  he  is  supposed  to  have  been  permanently  reconciled  to 
Pittacus,  and  to  have  passed  the  remainder  of  his  life  in  tranquillity  at 
Mytilene,  under  the  mild  sway  of  that  patriotic  ruler ;  by  others,  to  have 
ended  his  days  a  discontented  wanderer  in  foreign  lands.  In  the  course 
of  his  peregrinations,  and  of  the  maritime  disasters  with  which  Horace 
describes  them  as  having  been  attended,3  he  visited  Egypt  ;*  and,  about 
the  same  time,  his  brother  Antimenidas,  his  steady  companion,  it  would 
seem,  in  good  or  bad  fortune,  entered  into  the  service  of  the  Babylo 
nian  monarch  Nebuchadnezzar,  where  he  distinguished  himself  by  his 
valor.6 

The  poems  of  Alcaeus  were  chiefly  addressed  to  particular  friends,  and 
at  first  they  seem  not  to  have  been  much  known  beyond  the  island  of 
Lesbos,  partly  because  they  were  written  in  the  ^Eolic  dialect,  and  partly, 
perhaps,  because  they  had  only  a  local  and  temporary  interest.  But  sub 
sequently  they  were  considered  by  all  the  Greeks  as  master-pieces  ;  and 
among  the  nine  lyric  poets  in  the  Alexandrean  canon,  Alcasus  occupied, 
according  to  some  authorities,  the  first,  and,  according  to  others,  the  sec 
ond  place.  Aristophanes  and  Aristarchus  prepared  the  first  correct  edi 
tions,  in  which  the  poems  were  divided  into  at  least  ten  books,  and  great 
care  was  taken  to  insure  the  correct  representation  of  the  metre.  It  is 
not  known  how  the  poems  were  arranged  in  these  editions,  except  that 
the  hymns  formed  the  commencement.  Besides  these  hymns,  the  poems 
of  Alcaeus  consisted  of  odes,  patriotic  war-songs,  erotic  and  symposiac 
songs,  and  epigrams.  All  were  characterized  by  strong  passion  and  en 
thusiasm.  With  Alcaeus,  as  with  most  poets  of  the  ^Eolic  school,  poetry 
was  the  outpouring  of  his  deepest  emotions,  excited  by  the  occurrences 
of  the  times  in  which  he  lived.  Independent  of  their  high  poetical  mer 
its,  the  loss  of  the  poems  of  Alcseus  is  much  to  be  regretted,  as  thej 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  JHog.  Laert.,  i.,  76 ;  Val.  Max..  iv.,  1,  ft.  " 

3  C*rm.t  ii.,  13,  28.  *  Strab.,  i.,  p.  37.  *  ^fc.,  Frag.  33,  p.  433.  klomf. 


108  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

would  have  enabled  us  to  gain  a  clearer  insight  into  the  public  and  pri 
vate  life  of  the  ./Eolians.1 

The  metrical  forms  used  by  Alcaeus  are  most  light  and  lively  ;  some 
times  with  a  softer,  sometimes  with  a  more  vehement  character.  They 
consist  principally  of  ^Eolic  dactyls,  which,  though  apparently  resembling 
the  dactyls  of  epic  poetry,  are  yet  essentially  unlike.  Instead  of  depend 
ing  upon  the  perfect  balance  of  the  Arsis  and  Thesis,  they  admit  the 
shortening  of  the  former  ;  whence  arises  an  irregularity,  which  was  dis 
tinguished  by  the  ancient  writers  on  metre  by  the  name  of  disproportioncd 
dactyls  (&\oyoi  $O.KTV\OI).  These  dactyls  begin  with  the  undetermined 
foot  of  two  syllables,  which  is  called  a  base,  and  they  flow  on  lightly  and 
swiftly,  without  alternating  with  heavy  spondees.  The  choriambics  of 
the  ^Eolic  lyric  poets  are  composed  on  the  same  plan,  as  they  have  also 
the  preceding  base  ;  yet  this  metre  always  retains  something  of  the  state 
ly  tone  which  belongs  to  it.  The  Logaoedic  metre  also  belongs  peculiarly 
to  the  JEolic  lyric  poets.  It  is  produced  by  the  immediate  junction  of 
dactylic  and  trochaic  feet,  so  that  a  rapid  movement  passes  into  a  feebler 
one.  This  lengthened  and  various  kind  of  metre  was  peculiarly  adapted 
to  express  the  softer  emotions,  such  as  tenderness,  melancholy,  and  long 
ing.  Hence  this  metre  was  frequently  used  by  the  ^olians,  and  their 
strophes  Were  principally  formed  by  connecting  logacedic  rhythms  with 
trochees,  iambi,  and  ^Eolic  dactyls.  Of  this  kind  is  the  Sapphic  strophe, 
the  softest  and  sweetest  metre  in  the  Greek  lyric  poetry,  and  which  Al 
caeus  seems  sometimes  to  have  employed,  as  in  his  hymn  to  Hermes. 
But  the  firmer  and  more  vigorous  tone  of  the  metre,  called  after  him  the 
Alcaic,  was  better  suited  to  the  temper  of  his  mind.  The  logacedic  ele 
ments  of  this  metre  have  but  little  of  their  characteristic  softness,  and 
they  receive  an  impulse  from  the  iambic  dipodies  which  precede  them. 
Hence  the  Alcaic  strophe  is  generally  employed  by  these  poets  in  polit 
ical  and  warlike  poems,  and  in  all  in  which  manly  passions  predomin 
ate.2 

The  fragments  of  Alceeus  were  iirst  collected  by  Neander  in  his  Aris- 
tologia  Pindarica,  Basil,  1556,  8vo,  then  by  Henry  Stephens  in  his  collec 
tion  of  the  fragments  of  the  nine  chief  lyric  poets  of  Greece  (1557),  of 
which  there  are  several  editions,  and  by  Fulvius  Ursinus,  1568,  8vo.  The 
more  modern  collections  are  those  by  lani,  Halae  Sax.,  1780-1782,  4to  ; 
by  Stange,  Halae,  1810,  8vo  ;  by  Blomfield,  in  the  Museum  Criticum,  vol. 
i.,  p.  421,  seqq.,  Camb.,  1826,  reprinted  in  Gaisford's  Poetce  Greed  Minores; 
by  Schneidewin,  in  his  Delectus  Poesis  Gr<zcorum,  and  by  Bergk  in  his 
Poetce  Lyrici  Graci.  Of  separate  editions,  that  of  Matthiae,  Lips.,  1827, 
used  to  be  regarded  as  the  most  complete,  until  the  appearance  of  Bergk's 
work.  This  last-mentioned  is  now  deemed  the  most  complete  collec 
tion,  since  it  contains  the  additions  and  supplements  made  by  Welcker, 
Seidler,  Osann,  and  others,  in  several  philological  journals  in  Germany, 
as  well  as  those  contained  in  Cramer's  Anecdota  Grceca,  vol.  i.,  Oxon., 
1835. 

II.  SAPPHO  (2cnr<|>6$,  or,  in  her  own  ^olic  dialect,  ydirQa)  was  a  native 


Miilkr,  p.  170,  seqq.  -  Id.  ib. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  109 

of  the  island  of  Lesbos,  though  the  exact  place  of  her  birth  is  uncertain, 
for,  according  to  some,  she  was  born  in  Eresus,  but  according  to  others 
in  Mytilene.  The  time  of  her  birth  is  also  unknown,  and  there  are  few 
events  of  her  life  which  can  be  exactly  ascertained.  Her  own  frag 
ments,  as  well  as  those  of  Alceeus,  show  that  these  two  greatest  poets 
of  the  JEolic  school  were  contemporaries,  though  Sappho  must  have  been 
younger  than  Alcaeus,  for  she  was  still  alive  in  568  B.C.,  as  may.  be  in 
ferred  from  the  ode  which  she  addressed  to  her  brother  Charaxus,  in 
which  she  reproached  him  for  having  purchased  Rhodopis.  the  courtesan, 
from  her  master,  and  having  been  induced,  by  his  love  for  her,  to  eman 
cipate  her.1  Now  Charaxus  bought  Rhodopis  at  Naucratis,  in  Egypt,  and 
in  all  probability  not  before  the  reign  of  Amasis,  who  ascended  the  throne 
in  569  B.C.  Before  this  time,  and  while  she  was  still  in  the  prime  of 
life,  Sappho  is  said  to  have  left  her  country  for  Sicily,  but  the  cause  of 
this  flight  is  unknown. 

It  was  formerly  a  common  belief  that  Sappho  destroyed  herself  by 
leaping  into  the  sea  from  the  Leucadian  promontory,  in  despair  at  her 
love  being  unrequited  by  a  youth  named  Phaon.  This  story,  however, 
vanishes  at  the  first  approach  of  criticism.  The  name  of  Phaon  does 
not  occur  in  one  of  Sappho's  fragments,  and  there  is  no  evidence  that  it 
was  once  mentioned  in  her  poems.  It  first  appears  in  the  Attic  come 
dies,  and  is  probably  derived  from  the  legend  of  the  love  of  Venus  for 
Adonis,  who,  in  the  Greek  version  of  the  myth,  was  called  Phaethon  or 
Phaon,  "  the  bright  or  shining  one."  How  this  name  came  to  be  con 
nected  with  that  of  Sappho  it  is  now  impossible  to  trace.  There  are 
passages  in  her  poems  referring  to  her  love  for  a  beautiful  youth,  whom 
she  endeavored  to  conciliate  by  her  poetry ;  and  these  passages  may  per 
haps  be  the  foundation  for  the  story.  As  for  the  leap  from  the  Leuca 
dian  rock,  it  is  a  mere  metaphor,  which  is  taken  from  an  expiatory  rite 
connected  with  the  worship  of  Apollo,  and  which  seems  to  have  been  a 
frequent  poetical  image  ;  it  occurs  in  Stesichorus  and  Anacreon,  and 
may  have  been  used  by  Sappho,  though  it  is  not  to  be  found  in  any  of 
her  extant  fragments.  A  remarkable  confirmation  of  the  unreal  nature 
of  the  whole  legend  is  the  fact  that  none  of  the  writers  who  relate  it  go 
so  far  as  positively  to  assert  that  Sappho  died  in  consequence  of  her 
frantic  leap.2 

At  Mytilene,  Sappho  appears  to  have  been  the  centre  of  a  female  liter 
ary  society,  most  of  the  members  of  which  were  her  pupils,  and  her  char 
acter  for  purity,  in  connection  with  this  association,  appears,  if  we  credit 
the  ancient  accounts,  to  have  been  seriously  marred.  Advocates  have, 
indeed,  been  found  in  more  modern  days  who  strive  to  vindicate  the  per 
sonal  character  of  the  poetess  ;  and  one  of  their  principal  arguments  in 
her  favor  is  as  follows  :  that  Sappho  belonged  to  the  JEolic  race,  which, 
at  the  time  when  the  state  of  society  in  Attica  had  assumed  a  totally  dif 
ferent  aspect  from  that  of  the  Heroic  Age,  still  retained  much  of  the  sim 
plicity  of  early  Greek  manners :  that  at  Athens,  on  the  contrary,  women 

i  Herod.,  ii.,  135  ;  Strab.,  xvii.,  p.  808  ;  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  596,  B. 
=  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


110  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

lived  in  the  strictest  seclusion,  and  that  hence  the  free  intercourse  of 
women  of  ability,  such  as  Sappho  and  her  numerous  friends,  would  lead 
to  the  opinion  among  Athenians  that  she  pursued  an  immoral  life.  Plaus 
ible,  however,  as  this  reasoning  is,  it  is  very  far  from  being  satisfactory  ; 
and  it  is  impossible  to  read  the  fragments  which  remain  of  Sappho's  po 
etry  without  being  forced  to  come  to  the  conclusion  that  a  female  who 
could  write  such  verses  could  not  be  the  pure  and  virtuous  wroman  which 
her  modern  apologists  pretend.1 

But  whatever  doubt  there  may  be  as  to  the  moral  character  of  Sappho, 
there  can  be  only  one  opinion  as  to  her  poetic  genius.  It  is  almost  super 
fluous  to  refer  to  the  numerous  passages  in  which  the  ancient  writers 
have  expressed  their  unbounded  admiration  of  her  productions.  In  true 
poetic  genius  she  appears  to  have  been  fully  equal  to  Alcseus,  and  far  su 
perior  to  him  in  grace  and  sweetness.  Of  all  Greek  lyric  poets,  she  is 
the  one,  perhaps,  who,  in  her  own  peculiar  branch  of  inspiration,  was  held 
to  have  attained  most  nearly  to  perfection.  She  was  complimented  with 
the  title  of  the  "  Tenth  Muse,"  and  already  in  her  own  age,  if  we  may 
believe  an  interesting  tradition,  the  recitation  of  one  of  her  poems  so  af 
fected  Solon  that  he  expressed  an  earnest  desire  to  learn  it  before  he 
died  (ft/a  fj.aOwv  a.vr'b  aTro6dvw).2  Strabo  speaks  of  her  as  d-au/uaordV  n  xpv- 
jiio,3  and  the  praises  and  imitations  of  her  by  Catullus  and  Horace  are  too 
well  known  to  require  any  mention  here.  The  fragments  that  survive 
of  her  poetry,  though  some  of  them  are  exquisite,  barely  furnish  a  sample 
of  the  surpassing  beauty  of  the  whole.  They  are  chiefly  of  an  erotic 
character  ;  and  at  the  head  of  this  class  must  be  placed  that  splendid  ode 
to  Venus,  of  which  we  possess  the  whole,  and  next  to  it  the  shorter  one 
to  a  beloved  female. 

Sappho  is  described,  by  the  only  authors  who  have  transmitted  any 
distinct  notices  on  the  subject,  as  not  distinguished  for  personal  beauty, 
but  as  short  in  stature,  and  of  dark,  it  may  be  understood  swarthy,  com 
plexion.  The  laudatory  commonplace  of  /caA.^,  or  "  fair,"  which  Plato 
and  others  connect  with  her  name,  implies  nothing  more,  perhaps  less, 
than  does  the  English  term  by  which  the  Greek  epithet  has  here  been 
rendered,  and  which  is  as  frequently  bestowed,  in  familiar  usage,  on  plain 
as  on  handsome  women.  Alcaeus  describes  her  simply  as  "  dark-haired," 
and  sweetly  smiling. 

The  lyric  poems  of  Sappho  formed  nine  books.  She  appears  also  to 
have  composed  a  large  number  of  hymeneals,  or  nuptial  songs,  of  which 
we  possess  some  very  beautiful  fragments.  Her  hymns  invoking  the  gods 
(01  K\I]TIKOI  tipvoi)  are  mentioned  by  the  rhetorician  Menander,*  who  tells 


1  Consult,  on  this  subject,  Welcker,  Sappho  von  einem  hcrrsch.  Vorurth.  befreyet,  Gott., 
1816,  and  in  his  Kleine  Schr.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  80,  aeqq.  ;  Mutter,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  172,  seqq. 
Bode,  Gesch.  der  Hell.  Dichtk.,  vol.  ii.,  pt.  ii.,  p.  411,  seqq.;  Neue,  Sapphonis  Fragmenta; 
Ulrici,  Gesch.  der  Hell.  Dichtk.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  359,  seqq.;  Richter,  Sappho  und  Erinna.    We 
have  adopted  in  the  text  the  views  of  Mure,  who  gives  the  whole  matter  a  very  careful 
and  fair  examination  (Crit.  Hist.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  290,  seqq.,  and  Appendix  F,  p.  497,  seqq.). 
In  the  larger  Biographical  Dictionary  of  Smith,  Sappho's  character  is  warmly  defended, 
in  the  abridgment  of  the  same  work  it  is  condemned. 

2  Mlian.  op,  Stob.,Serm.,  xxix  ,  58.  »  Str&b.,  xiii.,  p  Mt.  *  Encom  ,  i  ,  <>. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  Ill 

us  that  among  them  were  many  to  Diana  and  Venus,  in  which  the  vari 
ous  localities  of  their  worship  were  mentioned.  Suidas  also  ascribes  to 
her  epigrams,  elegies,  iambics,  and  monodies.  The  Greek  anthology  con 
tains  three  epigrams  under  her  name,  but  their  genuineness  is  doubtful. 
Her  poems  were  all  written  in  her  native  yEolic  dialect,  and  form  with 
those  of  Alcseus  the  standard  of  the  JEolic  dialect  of  Lesbos.  The  rhyth 
mical  construction  of  her  odes  was  essentially  the  same  as  that  of  Alcae- 
us,  though  with  many  variations,  and  in  harmony  with  the  softer  charac 
ter  of  her  poetry.1 

A  few  remarks  may  not  here  be  amiss  respecting  the  musical  and 
rhythmical  forms  in  which  the  poetry  of  Sappho  was  embodied.  Hero 
dotus  calls  her  generically  /j.ovo-oTroi6s.  Suidas  uses  the  specific  terms 
Aupi/dj  and  \l/d\rpia.  Her  instrument  was  the  harp,  which  she  seems  to 
have  used  both  in  the  form  of  the  ^Eolian  barbiton  and  the  Lydian  pectis. 
The  invention  of  the  latter  was  ascribed  to  her  by  some  of  the  ancients. 
Her  chief  mode  of  music  was  the  Mixolydian,  the  tender  and  plaintive 
character  of  which  was  admirably  adapted  to  her  erotic  poems,  and  the 
invention  of  which  was  ascribed  to  her  by  Aristoxenus,  although  others 
assigned  it  to  Pythoclides,  and  others  to  Terpander.2 

Of  the  metres  of  Sappho,  the  most  important  is  that  which  bears  her 
name,  and  which  only  differs  from  the  Alcaic  by  the  position  of  a  short 
syllable,  which  ends  the  Sapphic  and  begins  the  Alcaic  verse ;  thus,  for 
example, 

I  Grandlnis  mlslt  pater  It  ruben  te 
Vid\es  ut  alta  stet  nlve  cundidum. 

From  the  resemblance  between  the  two  forms,  and  from  the  frequent  oc 
currence  of  each  of  them  in  the  fragments  of  Sappho  and  Alcaeus,  and  in 
the  odes  of  Catullus  and  Horace,  we  may  fairly  conclude  that  in  these 
two  verses  we  have  the  most  characteristic  rhythm  of  the  ^Eolian  lyric 
poetry.  A  new  and  manifestly  more  correct  mode  of  reading  the  Sapphic 
verse  is  now  beginning  to  prevail,  the  nature  of  which  may  be  understood 
from  the  authorities  mentioned  in  the  notes.3 

The  fragments  of  Sappho  have  appeared  in  numerous  collections,  par 
ticularly  in  Brunck's  AnalectA,  vol.  i.,  p.  54,  seqq. ;  vol.  iii.,  p.  8,  seqq. ;  in 
the  Museum  Criticum,  vol.  i.,  by  Blomfield ;  by  Gaisford,  in  his  Poette 
Graci  Minores ;  by  Schneidewin,  in  his  Delectus  Poesis  Grcecorum ;  in 
Ahren's  treatise,  "  De  Lingua  Gr&ca  Dialectis  ,•"  and  in  Bergk's  Poetcz 
Lyrici  Graci.  The  best  separate  edition  is  that  of  Neue,  Berol.,  1827,  4to. 

III.  ERINNA  ("Hpiwa),  a  contemporary  and  friend  of  Sappho  (about  B.C. 
612),  who  died  at  the  age  of  nineteen,  but  left  behind  her  poems  which 
were  thought  worthy  to  rank  with  those  of  Homer.  Her  poems  were  of 
the  epic  class  ;  the  chief  of  them  was  entitled  'HACKC^T/,  "  The  Distaff;" 
it  consisted  of  three  hundred  lines,  of  which  only  four  are  extant.4  It 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib. 

3  Journal  of  Education,  vol.  iv.,  p.  356;  Penny  Cyclopaedia,  s.  v.  Arsis.  Compare  Don 
aldson's  Varronianus,  p.  275.  The  prior  claim  to  the  discovery,  or,  rather,  introduction 
of  this  new  mode  of  reading  Sapphics,  gave  rise  to  a  pamphlet  warfare  between  Dr.  Don 
aldson  and  Professor  Key  of  the  London  University. 

*  Stob.,Flor.,  cxviii.,  4  ;  Athen.,  vii.,  p.  283,  D ;  Bergk,  Poet.  Lyr.  Graze.,  p.  632. 


112  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

was  written  in  a  dialect  which  was  a  mixture  of  the  Doric  and  ^Eolic,  and 
which  was  spoken  at  Rhodes,  where,  or  in  the  adjacent  island  of  Telos, 
Erinna  was  born.  She  is  also  called  a  Lesbian  and  a  Mytilenean,  on  ac 
count  of  her  residence  in  Lesbos  with  Sappho.1  There  are  several  epi 
grams  upon  Erinna,  in  which  her  praise  is  celebrated,  and  her  untimely 
death  is  lamented.2  Three  epigrams  in  the  Greek  Anthology  are  ascribed 
to  her,3  of  which  the  first  has  the  genuine  air  of  antiquity,  but  the  other 
two,  addressed  to  Baucis,  seem  to  be  a  later  fabrication.4 

IV.  We  come  next  to  ANACREON  ('Ai/a/cpeW),  whose  poetry  may  be  con 
sidered  as  akin  to  that  of  Alcseus  and  Sappho,  although  he  was  an  Ionian, 
a  native  of  Teos,  and  his  genius  had  an  entirely  different  tone  and  bent. 
The  accounts  of  his  life  are  meagre  and  confused,  but  he  seems  to  have 
spent  his  youth  in  his  native -city,  and  to  have  removed  with  the  great 
body  of  the  inhabitants  to  Abdera,  in  Thrace,  when  Teos  was  taken  by 
Harpagus,  the  general  of  Cyrus,  about  B.C.  540. 5  If  this  statement  be 
true,  Anacreon  can  not  have  remained  long  at  Abdera,  for  it  was  about 
this  same  time  that  Polycrates  became  tyrant  of  Samos ;  and  it  is  said 
that  Anacreon  was  invited  from  Teos,  by  the  father  of  Polycrates,  at  the 
request  of  the  latter,  and  before  he  became  tyrant,  to  be  his  instructor 
and  friend.  Hence  the  account  of  his  emigration  to  Abdera  is  rejected 
by  some  critics.  Anacreon  remained  in  Samos  till  after,  or,  at  least,  till 
shortly  before  the  murder  of  his  friend  and  patron,  in  B.C.  522.  He  then 
went  to  Athens,  on  the  invitation  of  the  tyrant  Hipparchus,6  where  he  be 
came  acquainted  with  Simonides  and  other  poets.  After  the  death  of 
Hipparchus  in  B.C .  514,  Anacreon  appears  to  have  returned  to  Teos.  He 
died  at  the  age  of  85,  probably  about  B.C.  478,  but  the  place  of  his  death 
is  uncertain.  Simonides  wrote  two  epitaphs  upon  him,  the  second  of 
which  appears  to  say  clearly  that  he  was  buried  at  Teos,  but  there  is  also 
a  tradition  that,  after  his  return  to  Teos,  he  fled  a  second  time  to  Abdera, 
in  consequence  of  the  revolt  of  Histiseus.  This  tradition,  however,  very 
probably  arose  from  a  confusion  with  the  original  emigration  of  the  Teians 
to  Abdera.7 

The  death  of  Anacreon  is  said  to  have  been  occasioned  by  a  dried  grape, 
which  choked  him,  an  account,  however,  which  looks  too  like  a  poetical 
fiction.  The  statement  that  he  was  a  lover  of  Sappho  is,  if  not  impos 
sible,  at  least  in  the  highest  degree  improbable,  and  arose  from  the  prac 
tice,  so  common  among  writers  of  antiquity,  of  placing  persons  of  the 
same  character  in  some  sort  of  relation  to  each  other.  His  native  town, 
proud  of  the  poet,  placed  sometimes  his  full  figure,  sometimes  his  bust 
only,  on  its  coins,  some  of  which  are  still  extant. 

As  a  man,  Anacreon  has  often  been  viewed  in  a  false  light,  both  in  the 
later  periods  of  antiquity  and  in  modern  times,  being  regarded,  in  fact,  as 
a  most  consummate  voluptuary.  The  ancients,  however,  considered  his 


1  Suidas,  s.  v. ;  Eustath.  ad.  II.,  ii.,  726,  p.  326. 

2  Brunck,  Anal.,  vol.  i.,  p.  241,  n.  81  ;  p.  218,  n.  35  ;  vol.  ii.,  p.  19,  n.  47,  &c. 

3  Id.  ib.,  p.  58  ;  Jacobs,  vol.  i.,  p.  50.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 
5  Stfdb.,  xiv.,  p.  638 ;  Herod.,  iii..  121.  c  piat.,  Hipparch.,  p.  228. 
7  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


POETICAL    PERIOD.  113 

residence  at  the  court  of  Polycrates  as  one  of  the  greatest  favors  that  for 
tune  bestowed  upon  this  prince.  It  is  attested  by  the  best  authorities  thai 
Anacreon,  although  courted  by  the  powerful  and  the  rich,  did  not  use  his 
influence  for  purposes  of  base  gain.  He  even  rejected  the  munificent 
presents  of  Polycrates,  declaring  that  they  were  not  worth  the  trouble  of 
keeping.  Enjoying  his  talent  of  song,  he  lived  a  simple  and  happy  life. 
In  his  enthusiasm  for  love  and  song,  he  never  transgressed  the  boundaries 
of  a  pure  poetical  feeling.  There  have  always  been  persons  unable  to 
understand  how  a  poet  can  sing  of  drunken  revelry,  and  yet  be  a  sober 
man,  and  how  the  mere  sight  of  the  beautiful  can  raise  enthusiasm.  All 
the  writers  of  the  best  times  of  Greece  speak  of  Anacreon,  as  a  man,  in 
the  same  high  terms  in  which  they  record  his  merit  as  a  poet ;  and  a 
poet  whom  Plato  calls  the  wise,  was  assuredly  not  a  lover  of  licentious 
ness.1 

We  still  possess  numerous  fragments  of  the  genuine  poems  of  Anac 
reon,  which  enable  us  to  form  a  notion  of  the  character  of  his  poetry,  and 
which  justify  the  universal  admiration  of  antiquity.  The  praise  of  beau 
ty,  love,  and  wine  was  the  substance  of  his  poems  from  his  earliest  to 
his  latest  age ;  and  the  cheerful  and  joyous  old  man,  as  Anacreon  de 
scribes  himself  in  some  of  his  latest  productions,  has  made  so  strong  an 
impression,  that  we  can  scarcely  picture  him  to  ourselves  in  any  other 
form  than  that  of  an  aged  person,  although  the  greater  part  of  his  frag 
ments  belong  to  the  period  which  he  spent  at  Samos  and  Athens.  Simoni- 
des,  his  contemporary,  in  a  fragment  still  extant,  gives  a  most  lively  picture 
of  Anacreon's  character,  and  says  that  his  whole  life  breathed  the  Graces, 
Bacchus,  and  Love.  It  was  part  of  the  poet's  Ionic  nature  that  his  po 
ems  on  these  subjects  were  more  light  and  playful  than  the  deep  and 
impassioned  songs  of  Sappho  and  Alcseus.  The  collection  of  these  songs, 
which  was  probably  made  long  after  his  time,  consisted  of  at  least  five 
books :  they  were  extremely  popular,  and  we  have  evidence  that  in  the 
time  of  Plutarch  and  Athenaeus  they  were  sung  on  every  joyous  and  fes 
tive  occasion,  to  tunes  composed  by  the  poet  himself.  Besides  these 
lighter  poems,  he  also  wrote  elegies,  iambic  poems  or  satires,  epigrams 
(of  which  several  are  still  extant  in  the  Greek  Anthology),  and  hymns. 
All  his  poems  were  composed  in  the  Ionic  dialect.2 

Besides  the  numerous  fragments  of  the  genuine  poems  of  Anacreon 
preserved  in  ancient  writers,  there  is  a  collection  of  fifty-five  odes  which 
have  been  generally  considered  as  poems  of  Anacreon,  most  of  which, 
however,  are  productions  of  a  much  later  age.  This  collection  was  first 
published  by  Henry  Stephens,  Paris,  1554,  4to,  from  two  manuscripts 
which  he  describes  very  vaguely,  and  which  no  one  else  has  seen.  The 
same  poems,  however,  were  subsequently  found  in  the  Codex  Palatinus 
(now  at  Heidelberg)  of  the  Greek  Anthology,  though  arranged  in  a  differ 
ent  order  from  that  in  the  edition  of  Stephens.  These  poems  have  been 
subsequently  published  in  numerous  editions,  but  the  best  are  those  of 
Brunck,  Strasb.,  1786;  Fischer,  Lips.,  1793;  Mehlhorn,  Glogau,  1825;  and 
Bergk,  Lips.,  1834.  The  genuine  fragments  are  given  along  with  them. 
1  Biograph.  Diet.  ofSoc.for  Diff.  of  Useful  Knowledge,  vol.  ii.,  pt.  ji,,  p.  529,  2  /& 

H 


114  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Most  of  these  lifty-five  poems  are  pretty  in  their  way,  but  exhibit  very 
little  of  the  character  and  spirit  which  we  perceive  in  the  genuine  frag 
ments  of  Anacreon ;  and  all  modern  critics  are  agreed  that  they  are  not 
the  work  of  this  poet,  although  they  have  been  translated  into  all  Europe 
an  languages,  and  have,  with  the  majority  of  persons,  been  the  ground 
work  upon  which  they  have  formed  their  notions  of  Anacreon.  In  order 
to  understand  how  it  was  possible  for  such  a  number  of  poems  to  be  at 
tributed  to  him,  we  must  recollect  that,  down  to  the  third  century  of  our 
era,  the  poems  of  Anacreon  enjoyed  extraordinary  popularity,  and  that 
many  poets  attempted  to  write  in  his  style.  In  proportion  as  such  imita 
tions  suited  the  taste  of  their  age,  they  became  popular  under  the  name 
of  Anacreontic  songs.  Those  who  collected  such  popular  poems  in  later 
times  were  frequently  unable  to  judge  of  their  merits,  and  they  admitted 
into  their  collections  what  was  most  popular  or  most  suited  to  their  taste. 
It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  poems,  now  commonly  known  under 
the  name  of  Anacreon,  were  a  collection  of  this  kind,  made  many  centu 
ries  after  the  time  of  that  poet.  They  are  very  unequal,  and  some  may 
have  been  written  soon  after  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  while  oth 
ers  bear  strong  marks  of  belonging  to  that  description  of  poetry  which 
was  written  during  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  The  chief  reasons 
why  they  can  not  be  attributed  to  Anacreon  are  briefly  these  :  1.  Among 
the  numerous  passages  cited  by  ancient  writers  from  Anacreon,  there  is 
only  one,  and  that  in  a  very  late  writer,  which  refers  to  any  poem  con 
tained  in  the  collection  published  by  Stephens.  2.  The  genuine  poems  of 
Anacreon  were  full  of  allusions  to  circumstances  and  persons  around  him, 
whereas,  in  the  odes  of  Stephens's  collection  there  is  scarcely  any  thing 
that  suggests  the  circumstances  of  the  author's  life  ;  they  rather  resem 
ble  modern  poems,  written  in  the  closet,  than  the  ancient  Greek  lyrics, 
which  are  all  drawn  from  the  freshness  of  real  life.  3.  They  contain  ideas 
which  were  altogether  foreign  to  the  age  of  Anacreon.  One  example  may 
suffice.  The  god  of  Love  (Eros),  down  to  the  time  of  Alexander,  and 
even  later,  was  always  represented  as  a  full-grown  youth ;  but  in  this 
collection  he  is  always  described  as  a  wanton  and  mischievous  little  boy. 
4.  The  language  in  some  of  the  odes  is  barbarous,  the  versification  faulty, 
and  the  sentiments  trivial.  For  further  particulars  on  all  these  points, 
the  student  can  consult  Fischer's  preface  to  his  second  edition  of  Anac 
reon.1 

In  Anacreon  we  see  plainly  how  the  spirit  of  the  Ionic  race,  notwith 
standing  the  elegance  and  refinement  of  Ionian  manners,  had  lost  its  en 
ergy,  its  warmth  of  moral  feeling,  and  its  power  of  serious  reflection,  and 
was  reduced  to  a  light  play  of  pleasing  thoughts  and  sentiments.  The 
Ionic  softness  and  departure  from  strict  rule  which  characterizes  his  po 
etry  may  also  be  perceived  in  his  versification.  His  language  approached 
much  nearer  to  the  style  of  common  conversation  than  that  of  the  JEolic 
lyric  poets,  so  as  frequently  to  seem  like  prose  embellished  with  orna 
mental  epithets  ;  and  his  rhythm  is  also  softer  and  less  bounding  than 
that  of  the  ^Eolians,  and  has  an  easy  and  graceful  negligence,  which 


Biosrapk.  Diet.  ofSoc.for  Diff.  of  Useful  Knowledge,  vol.  ii.,  pt.  ii.,  p.  529. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  115 

Horace  has  endeavored  to  imitate.  Sometimes  he  makes  use  of  logacedic 
metres,  as  in  the  Glyconean  verses,  which -he  combines  into  strophes,  by 
subjoining  a  Pherecratean  verse  to  a  number  of  Glyconeans.  Sometimes, 
like  the  ^Eolic  lyric  poets,  he  used  long  choriambic  verses ;  and  again,  an 
alternation  of  choriambics  with  iambic  dipodies.  Another  measure  much 
used  by  him  was  the  Ionic  a  minore,  the  expression  of  which,  however, 
he  changed  by  combining  two  Ionic  feet,  so  that  the  last  long  syllable  of 
the  first  was  shortened,  and  the  first  short  syllable  of  the  second  foot  was 
lengthened,  by  which  change  the  second  foot  became  a  trochaic  dipody. 
By  this  process,  called  by  the  ancients  dvc£/cAa(m,  "  a  bending,"  or  "  refrac 
tion,"  the  metre  obtained  a  less  uniform,  and,  at  the  same  time,  a  softer 
expression,  and  thus,  when  distributed  into  short  verses,  it  became  pe 
culiarly  suited  to  erotic  poetry.  The  only  traces  of  this  metre  before 
Anacreon's  time  occur  in  two  fragments  of  Sappho.  Anacreon,  however, 
formed  upon  this  plan  a  great  variety  of  metres,  particularly  the  short 
Anacreontic  verse  (an  Ionic  dimeter),  which  occurs  so  frequently  both  in 
his  genuine  fragments  and  in  the  later  odes  imitated  from  his  style.1 

V.  With  Anacreon  ceased  the  species  of  lyric  poetry  in  which  he  ex 
celled  ;  indeed,  he  stands  alone  in  it,  and  the  tender  softness  of  his  song 
was  drowned  by  the  louder  tones  of  the  choral  poetry.  The  poem  (or 
melos)  destined  to  be  sung  by  a  single  person,  never,  among  the  Greeks, 
acquired  so  much  extent  as  it  has  since  attained  in  the  modern  English 
and  German  poetry.  By  modern  poets  it  has  been  used  as  the  vehicle  for 
expressing  almost  every  variety  of  thought  and  feeling.  The  ancients, 
however,  drew  a  more  precise  distinction  between  the  different  feelings 
to  be  expressed  in  different  forms  of  poetry,  and  reserved  the  ^Eolic  melos 
for  lively  emotions  of  the  mind  in  joy  or  sorrow,  or  for  impassioned  over 
flowings  of  an  oppressed  heart.  Anacreon's  poetry  contains  rather  the 
play  of  a  graceful  imagination  than  deep  emotion  ;  and  among  the  other 
Greeks,  there  is  no  instance  of  the  employment  of  lyric  poetry  for  the  ex 
pression  of  strong  feeling  ;  so  that  this  kind  of  poetry  was  confined  to  a 
short  period  of  time,  and  to  a  small  portion  of  the  Greek  territory.2 


CHAPTER  XIX. 
SECOND   OR  POETICAL  PERIOD— continued. 

LYRIC    POETR Y — continued. 

POETS     OF     THE     DORIAN     OR     CHORAL     SCHOOL.3 

I.  THE  characteristic  features  of  the  Doric  lyric  poetry  have  been  al 
ready  described,  for  the  purpose  of  distinguishing  it  from  the  ^Eolic. 
These  were  :  recitation  by  choruses,  the  artificial  structure  of  long 
strophes,  the  Doric  dialect,  and  its  reference  to  public  affairs,  especially 
to  the  celebration  of  divine  worship.  The  origin  of  this  kind  of  lyric  po 
etry  can  be  traced  to  the  earliest  times  of  Greece ;  for,  as  has  been  al- 
ready  shown,  choruses  were  generally  used  in  Greece  before  the  time  of 

1  MuUer,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  185.  3  Muller,  p.  187,  stqq.  3  Id.,  p.  190,  seqq. 


116  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Homer  ;  although  the  dancers  in  the  more  ancient  choruses  did  not  also 
sing,  and  therefore  an  exact  correspondence  of  all  their  motions  with  the 
words  of  the  song  was  not  requisite. 

II.  The  production  of  those  polished  forms  in  which  the  style  of  sing 
ing  and  the  movements  of  the  dance  were  brought  into  perfect  harmony, 
coincides  with  the  last  advance  in  musical  art ;  the  improvements  in 
which,  made  by  Terpander,  Olympus,  and  Thaletas,  have  formed  the  sub 
ject  of  a  particular  notice.     In  the  first  century  subsequent  to  the  epoch 
of  these  musicians,  choral  poetry  does  not,  however,  appear  in  its  full 
perfection  and  individuality,  but  approaches  either  to  the  Lesbian  lyric 
poetry  or  to  the  epos  ;  and  thus  the  line  which  separated  these  two  kinds 
(between  which  the  choral  songs  occupy  a  middle  place)  gradually  became 
more  distinct.     Among  the  lyric  poets  whom  the  Alexandrean  gramma 
rians  placed  in  their  canon,  Alcman  and  Stesichorus  belong  to  this  period 
of  progress  ;  while  finished  lyric  poetry  is  represented  by  Ibycus,  Simoni- 
des,  with  his  disciple  Bacchylides,  and  Pindar.1 

III.  We  shall  now  proceed  to  take  a  view  of  these  poets  separately, 
classing  among  the  former  the  dithyrambic  poet  Arion,  and  among  the 
latter  Pindar's  instructor,  Lasus,  and  a  few  others  who  have  sufficient  in 
dividuality  of  character  to  distinguish  them  from  the  crowd. 

IV.  ALCMAN  ( 'AA/c^ai/),  called  by  the  Attic  and  later  Greek  writers  Alc- 
mczon  ('AA.K|waW),  of  which  Alcman  is  merely  the  Doric  form,  the  chief 
lyric  poet  of  Sparta,  wras  by  birth  a  Lydian,  and  a  native  of  Sardis.     He 
was  brought  into  Laconia  as  a  slave,  evidently  when  very  young.     His 
master,  whose  name  was  Agesidas,  discovered  his  genius  and  emanci 
pated  him,  and  he  then  began  to  distinguish  himself  as  a  lyric  poet.2    To 
what  extent  he  obtained  the  rights  of  citizenship  is  not  known.     Suidas 
calls  him  a  Laconian  of  Messoa,  one  of  the  quarters  or  divisions  of  Spar 
ta,  meaning  probably  that  he  was  enrolled  as  a  citizen  of  Messoa   after 
his  emancipation.     Alcman  probably  flourished  from  about  671  to  about 
631  B.C.     The  period  during  which  most  of  his  poems  were  composed 
was  that  which  followed  the  conclusion  of  the  second  Messenian  war. 
During  this  period  of  quiet  the  Spartans  began  to  cherish  that  taste  for 
the  spiritual  enjoyments  of  poetry,  which,  though  felt  by  them  long  be 
fore,  had  never  attained  to  a  high  state  of  cultivation  while  their  atten 
tion  was  absorbed  in  war.     In  this  process  of  improvement  Alcman  was 
immediately  preceded  by  Terpander.     But  besides  the  aid  which  he  de 
rived  from  the  important  changes  introduced  by  the  latter,  he  had  also  an 
intimate  acquaintance  with  the  Phrygian  and  Lydian  styles  of  music,  and 
he  was  himself  the  inventor  of  new  forms  of  rhythm,  some  of  which  bore 
his  name.3 

A  large  portion  of  Alcman's  poetry  was  erotic.  In  fact,  he  is  said  by 
some  ancient  writers  to  have  been  the  inventor  of  erotic  poetry.4  From 
his  poems  of  this  class,  which  were  marked  by  a  freedom  bordering  on 
licentiousness,  he  obtained  the  epithets  of  "  sweet"  and  "  pleasant"  (y\v- 
KVS,  xapifis).  Among  these  poems  were  many  hymeneal  pieces.  But  the 

i  Mvller,  p.  191.  2  Suid.,  s.  v.;  Heraclid.,  Polit.,  p.  206  ;  VettTpatl,  1,  18. 

3  Smith,  Diet,.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  4  Athen..,  xiii.,  p.  600 ;  Suid.,  s.  v. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  117 

Partkenia,  which  form  a  branch  of  Alcman's  poems,  must  not  be  confound 
ed  with  the  erotic.  They  were  so  called,  as  we  have  already  remarked, 
because  composed  for  the  purpose  of  being  sung  by  choruses  of  virgins,  and 
not  on  account  of  their  subjects,  which  were  very  various,  sometimes,  in 
deed,  erotic,  but  often  religious.  Alcman's  other  poems  embrace  hymns 
to  the  gods,  paeans,  prosodia,  songs  adapted  for  different  religious  festi 
vals,  and  short  ethical  or  philosophical  pieces.  It  is  disputed  whether  he 
wrote  any  anapaestic  war-songs,  or  embateria  ;  but  it  seems  very  unlike 
ly  that  he  should  have  neglected  a  kind  of  composition  which  had  been 
rendered  so  popular  by  Tyrtaeus.1 

His  metres  are  very  various.  He  is  said  by  Suidas  to  have  been  the 
first  poet  who  composed  any  but  dactylic  hexameters.  This  statement, 
however,  is  incorrect ;  but  Suidas  perhaps  refers  to  the  short  dactylic 
lines  into  which  Alcman  broke  up  the  Homeric  hexameter.  In  this  prac 
tice,  however,  he  had  been  preceded  by  Archilochus,  from  whom  he  bor 
rowed  several  others  of  his  peculiar  metres  ;  others  he  invented  himself. 
The  Cretic  hexameter  was  named  Alcmanic  from  his  being  its  inventor. 
The  poems  of  Alcman  were  chiefly  strophes,  composed  of  lines  sometimes 
of  the  same  metre  throughout  the  strophe,  sometimes  of  different  metres. 
His  dialect  was  the  Spartan  Doric,  with  an  intermixture  of  ^Eolic.  The 
popular  idioms  of  Laconia  appear  most  frequently  in  his  more  familiar 
poems.  The  Alexandrean  grammarians  placed  Alcman  at  the  head  of 
their  canon  of  the  nine  lyric  poets.  The  few  fragments  that  remain  of 
his  poetry,  though  some  of  them  are  very  beautiful,  scarcely  warrant  the 
admiration  which  the  ancients  have  expressed  of  him ;  but  this  may  be 
owing  to  their  extreme  shortness,  or  because  they  are  very  unfavorable 
specimens.  Mailer  endeavors  to  shield  Alcman  from  the  charge  of  licen 
tiousness,  but  the  terms  in  which  the  ancients  speak  of  this  are  so  strong 
that  we  can  not  well  acquiesce  in  so  favorable  a  representation  of  the 
character  of  his  erotic  poetry.2 

Alcman's  poems  comprised  six  books,  the  extant  fragments  of  which 
are  included  in  the  collections  of  Neander,  H.  Stephens,  Fulvius  Ursinus 
Schneidewm,  and  Bergk.  The  latest  and  best  edition  is  that  of  Welck- 
er,  Giessen,  1815. 

V.  STESICHORUS  (Zryvixopos)  of  Himera,  in  Sicily,  a  celebrated  poet  was 

contemporary  with  Sappho  and  Alca-us,  later  than  Alcman,  and  earlier 

than  Simonides.     He  is  said  to  have  been  born  B.C.  632,  and  to  have  died 

at  the  age  of  eighty,  or,  according  to  Lucian,  eighty-five.3     The  Parian 

marble  says  that  Stesichorus  the  poet  came  into  Greece  at  the  same 

time  at  which  /Eschylus  gained  his  first  tragic  victory,  B  C  475      But 

this  statement  refers,  no  doubt,  to  a  later  poet  of  the  same  name  and 

family.     Of  the  events  of  the  life  of  Stesichorus  we  have  only  a  few  ob- 

cure  accounts.     Like  other  great  poets,  his  birth  is  fabled  to  have  been 

nded  by  an  omen  :  a  nightingale  sat  upon  the  babe's  lips,  and  sang  a 

eet^strain^He  is  said  to  have  been  carefully  educated  at  Catana,  and 

1  Smith,  I.  c.  ~ 7~ 

3  Suid.,  s.  v.  •  Aristot.,  Rhet.,  ii.,  20,  5  ;  Lucian.,  Macrob.,  26.  • 
Chnstod.  Ecphr.  ap.  Jacobs,  Anth.  Grcec.,  vol.  i.,  p.  42 ;  Plin.,  H.  N.,  x.,  29. 


118  UREEK     LITERATURE. 

afterward  to  have  enjoyed  the  friendship  of  Phalaris,  the  tyrant  of  Agri- 
gentum.  Many  writers  relate  the  fable  of  his  being  miraculously  struck 
with  blindness  after  writing  an  attack  upon  Helen,  and  recovering  his 
sight  when  he  had  composed  a  recantation  or  palinodia.1  The  statement 
that  he  travelled  in  Greece  appears  to  be  supported  by  some  passages  in 
the  fragments  of  his  poems,  by  the  known  usage  of  the  early  Grecian  po 
ets,  and  by  the  confused  tradition  preserved  by  Suidas,  that  he  came  to 
Catana  as  an  exile  from  Pallantium,  in  Arcadia.  For  his  connection  with 
Catana,  and  his  burial  there,  we  have  several  testimonies.  Suidas  says 
that  he  was  buried  by  a  gate  of  the  city,  which  was  called  after  him  the 
Stesichorean  gate,  and  that  a  splendid  octagonal  monument  was  erected 
over  his  tomb,  having  eight  pillars,  and  eight  sets  of  steps,  and  eight  an 
gles  ;  whence,  according  to  some,  was  derived  the  name  STTJCTI'XO/W  £pi6- 
P.OS,  applied  to  the  throw  "  all  eight"  in  gaming.2 

Stesichorus  lived  at  a  time  when  the  serene  tone  of  the  epos,  and  an 
exclusive  devotion  to  a  mythical  subject  no  longer  sufficed  ;  the  predom 
inant  tendency  of  the  Greek  mind  was  toward  lyric  poetry.  He  himself 
was  powerfully  affected  by  this  taste,  and  consecrated  his  life  to  the  trans 
plantation  of  all  the  rich  materials,  and  the  mighty  and  imposing  shapes, 
which  had  hitherto  been  the  exclusive  property  of  the  epos,  to  the  choral 
poem.  His  special  business  was  the  training  and  direction  of  choruses, 
and  hence,  it  is  said,  he  was  called,  or  more  properly  assumed  the  name 
of,  Stesichorus,  or  "  leader  of  choruses,"  his  original  name  having  been 
Tisias.  Hence  Suidas  remarks  :  e«A^0ij  Se  2Ti7<rix<v>os,  #TI  irp£>Tos  Kidapy- 
5ia  xopbv  ftrnjow,  eVet  TOI  Trp6repov  Tiaias  e/caAe?TO.  In  Other  words,  it  was 
he  who  first  broke  the  monotonous  alternation  of  the  strophe  and  anti- 
strophe  through  a  whole  poem,  by  the  introduction  of  the  epode.  So 
great  was  the  celebrity  of  this  invention  in  later  times,  that  the  "  Triad 
of  Stesichorus"  (TO.  Tpia  2TTj<nx<fy>0")»  denoting  the  strophe,  antistrophe, 
and  epode,  passed  into  a  proverb  for  the  fundamental  elements  of  a  lib 
eral  education.  The  chorus  of  Stesichorus  seems  to  have  consisted  of  a 
combination  of  several  rows  or  members  of  eight  dancers ;  the  number 
eight  appears  indeed,  from  various  traditions,  to  have  been,  as  -it  were, 
consecrated  to  him,  a  number  which  we  have  already  mentioned  in  speak 
ing  of  his  tomb.3 

As  the  metres  of  Stesichorus  approach  much  more  nearly  to  the  epos 
than  those  of  Alcman,  as  his  dialect  also  is  founded  on  the  epic,  to  which 
he  gave  a  different  tone  only  by  the  most  frequent  and  current  Dorisms, 
so  also,  with  regard  to  the  matter  and  contents  of  his  poems,  Stesichorus 
makes,  of  all  lyric  poets,  the  nearest  approach  to  the  epic.  According  to 
the  elegant  language  of  Quintilian,  he  sustained  the  weight  of  epic  poetry 
with  the  lyre.4  The  subjects  of  his  poems  were  chiefly  heroic.  He  trans 
ferred  the  subjects  of  the  old  epic  poetry  to  the  lyric  form,  dropping,  of 
course,  the  continuous  narrative,  and  dwelling  on  isolated  adventures  of 
his  heroes.  He  also  composed  poems  on  other  subjects.  His  extant  re- 

1  Pausan.,  in.,  19,  11. 

2  Suid.,  s.  v.  Trai'Ta  OACTW  ;  Pollux,  ix.,  7  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

s  Mulier.  Hist.  Or.  Lit.,  p.  199.  *  Quint.,  x..  1,  62 ;  Midler,  p,  200. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  119 

mains  have  been  classified  under  the  following  heads:  1.  Mythological 
poems ;  2.  Hymns,  Encomia,  Epithalamia,  Paeans  ;  3.  Erotic  poems  and 
Scolia  ;  4.  A  pastoral  poem  entitled  Daphnis ;  5.  Fables  ;  6.  Elegies. 
From  what  we  have  remarked,  it  would  appear  that  the  poetry  of  Ste- 
sichorus  was  not  employed  in  expressing  his  own  feelings,  or  describing 
the  events  of  his  own  life,  but  that  he  preferred  the  past  to  the  present. 
This  character  seems  to  have  been  common  to  all  the  poems  of  Stesi- 
chorus.  Thus,  he  did  not,  like  Sappho,  compose  Epithalamia  having  an 
immediate  reference  to  the  present,  but  he  took  some  of  his  materials 
from  mythology.  The  beautiful  epithalamium  of  Theocritus,  supposed  to 
have  been  sung  by  the  Laconian  virgins  before  the  chamber  of  Menelaus 
and  Helen,  is,  in  part,  imitated  from  a  poem  of  Stesichorus.1 

The  fragments  of  Stesichorus  have  been  printed  with  the  editions  of 
Pindar  published  in  1560,  1566,  1567,  &c.,  and  in  the  collections  of  the 
Greek  poets  published  in  1568  and  1569,  and  recently  in  the  collections 
of  Schneidewin  and  Bergk.  They  have  also  been  edited  by  Suchfort, 
Getting.,  1771,  4to  ;  by  Blomfield,  in  the  Museum  Criticum,  vol.  ii.,  p.  256, 
seqq.;  in  Gaisford's  Poeta  Minores  Graci;  and  by  Kleine,  Berol.,  1828, 
8vo.  The  last  mentioned  is  by  far  the  most  useful  edition  of  his  frag 
ments,  and  the  authorities  respecting  the  life  and  writings  of  the  poet  are 
collected  and  discussed  in  a  preliminary  dissertation. 

VI.  Our  information  respecting  ARION  ('Apiw)  is  far  less  complete  and 
satisfactory,  yet  the  little  that  we  do  know  of  him  proves  the  wide  exten 
sion  of  lyric  poetry  in  the  time  of  Alcman  and  Stesichorus.  Arion  was  the 
contemporary  of  Stesichorus  ;  he  is  called  the  disciple  of  Alcman,  and  (ac 
cording  to  the  testimony  of  Herodotus)  nourished  during  the  reign  of  Peri- 
ander  at  Corinth,  between  628  and  585  B.C.  He  was  a  native  of  Methym- 
na,  in  Lesbos,  a  district  in  which  the  worship  of  Bacchus,  introduced  by 
the  Boeotians,  was  celebrated  with  orgiastic  rites  and  with  music.  The 
remarkable  adventure  of  which  he  became  the  hero,  and  the  preservation 
of  his  life  by  the  music-charmed  dolphin,  which  is  narrated  with  so  much 
attractive  simplicity  by  Herodotus,  has  contributed  nearly  as  much  to  his 
posthumous  fame  as  the  brilliancy  of  his  musical  compositions.2 

Arion  was  chiefly  known  in  Greece  as  the  perfecter  of  the  dithyramb,3 
of  which  we  have  already  given  a  general  account.  According  to  the 
concurrent  testimonies  of  the  historians  and  grammarians  of  antiquity,  he 
was  the  first  who  practiced  a  chorus  in  the  representation  of  a  dithyramb, 
and  therefore  gave  a  regular  and  dignified  character  to  this  song,  which 
before  had  probably  consisted  of  irregular  expressions  of  excited  feeling 
and  of  inarticulate  ejaculations.  This  improvement  was  made  by  Arion 
at  Corinth,  the  rich  and  flourishing  city  of  Periander.  The  choruses 
which  sang  the  dithyramb  were  cyclic  or  circular  choruses  (K{,K\IOL  X<WO, 
and  were  so  called  because  they  danced  in  a  circle  round  the  altar  on 
which  the  sacrifice  was  burning.  Accordingly,  in  the  time  of  Aristopha 
nes,  the  expressions  "  dithyrambic  poet"  and  "  teacher  of  cyclian  cho 
ruses"  (KVK\toSi5dcrKa\os)  were  nearly  synonymous. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  ;  Miiller,  p.  203.  2  Miiller,  p.  203 

3  Herod.,  i.,  23  ;  Scfiol  ad  Find..  Ol.,  xiii.,  25. 


120  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

With  regard  to  the  musical  accompaniments  of  the  dithyrambs  of  Ari 
on,  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  cithara  was  the  principal  instrument  used 
in  it,  and  not  the  flute,  as  in  the  boisterous  comus.  Arion  was  himself 
the  first  cithara-player  of  his  time,  and  the  exclusive  fame  of  the  Lesbian 
musicians  was  fully  maintained  by  him.  He  is  also  stated  to  have  com 
posed,  like  Terpander,  proosmia,  that  is,  hymns  to  the  gods,  which  served 
as  an  introduction  to  festivals.1  A  fragment  of  a  hymn  to  Neptune,  as 
cribed  to  Arion,  is  contained  in  Bergk's  Poeta  Lyrici  Graci.  Modern 
critical  opinion  has  been  much  divided  as  to  its  genuineness.  The  neg 
ative  appears  to  be  the  stronger  side. 

VII.  In  descending  to  the  choral  poets  who  lived  nearer  the  time  of 
the  Persian  war,  we  meet  with  two  of  very  peculiar  character,  the  vehe 
ment  Ibycus  and  the  tender  and  refined  Simonides. 

IBYCUS  (IjSwoj),  the  fifth  lyric  poet  of  the  Alexandrine  canon,  was  a 
native  of  Rhegium,  the  city  near  the  southernmost  point  of  Italy,  and 
which  was  closely  connected  with  Sicily,  the  country  of  Stesichorus. 
Rhegium  was  peopled  partly  by  lonians  from  Chalcis,  partly  by  Dorians 
from  the  Peloponnesus  ;  the  latter  of  whom  were  a  superior  class.  The 
peculiar  dialect  formed  in  Rhegium  had  some  influence  on  the  poems  of 
Ibycus  ;  although  these  were  in  general  written  in  an  epic  dialect  with  a 
Doric  tinge,  like  the  poems  of  Stesichorus.  Ibycus  spent  the  best  part 
of  his  life  at  Samos,  at  the  court  of  Polycrates,  about  B.C.  540.  Suidas 
erroneously  places  him  twenty  years  earlier,  in  the  time  of  Croesus,  and 
the  father  of  Polycrates.  We  have  no  farther  accounts  of  his  life  except 
the  well-known  story,  about  which  even  some  doubt  has  been  raised,  of 
the  manner  of  his  death.  While  travelling  through  a  desert  place  near 
Corinth,  he  was  attacked  by  robbers  and  mortally  wounded ;  but  before 
he  died  he  called  upon  a  flock  of  cranes  that  happened  to  fly  over  him  to 
avenge  his  death.  Soon  afterward,  when  the  people  of  Corinth  were  as 
sembled  in  the  theatre,  the  cranes  appeared,  and,  as  they  hovered  over 
the  heads  of  the  spectators,  one  of  the  murderers,  who  happened  to  be 
present,  cried  out  involuntarily,  ''Behold  the  avengers  of  Ibycus!"  and 
thus  were  the  authors  of  the  crime  detected.  The  phrase  al  'I&VKOV  y4- 
pavoi  passed  into  a  proverb.2 

The  poetry  of  Ibycus  was  chiefly  erotic,  and  partook  largely  of  the  im 
petuosity  of  his  character.  Others  of  his  poems  were  of  a  mythical  char- 
acter  and  heroic  caste,  but  some  of  these,  also,  were  partially  erotic.  In 
his  poems  on  heroic  subjects  he  very  much  resembled  Stesichorus,  his 
immediate  predecessor  in  the  canon,  and  hence  the  ancient  critics  often 
doubted  to  which  of  the  two  a  particular  idea  or  expression  belonged. 
The  metres  of  Ibycus  also  resemble  those  of  Stesichorus,  being  in  gen 
eral  dactylic  series,  connected  together  into  verses  of  different  lengths, 
but  sometimes  so  long  that  they  are  rather  to  be  called  systems  than 
verses.  Besides  these,  Ibycus  frequently  uses  logaoedic  verses  of  a  soft 
or  languid  character ;  and  in  general  his  rhythms  are  less  stately  and 

1  Miiller,  p.  205. 

2  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Antip,  Sid.,  Epig.,  78   ap.  Brunch,  Anal,  vol.  ii.,  p.  27  ;  Smith,  Diet  Bi- 
ograph.,  s.  t>. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  121 

dignified,  and  more  suitable  for  the  expression  of  passion,  than  those  of 
Stesichorus.  Suidas  mentions  seven  books  of  his  lyric  poems,  of  which 
only  a  few  fragments  now  remain.  The  best  edition  of  the  fragments  is 
that  of  Schneidewin,  Getting.,  1835,  Svo.1 

VIII.  Leaving  Ibycus  in  the  obscurity  which  envelops  all  the  Greek 
lyric  poets  anterior  to  Pindar,  we  come  to  a  brighter  point  in  Simonides. 
This  poet  has  already  been  described  as  one  of  the  greatest  masters  of 
the  elegy  and  the  epigram,  but  a  fuller  account  of  him  has  been  reserved 
for  this  place. 

SIMONIDES  (^OW'STJS)  was  born  at  lulis,  in  the  island  of  Ceos,  which 
was  inhabited  by  lonians.  His  birth-year  was  about  B.C.  556,  and  he 
lived,  according  to  a  precise  account,  89  years.  He  belonged  to  a  family 
which  sedulously  cultivated  the  musical  arts  ;2  his  grandfather  on  the 
paternal  side  had  been  a  poet ;  Bacchylides,  the  lyric  poet,  was  his  neph 
ew  ;  and  Simonides  the  younger  was  his  grandson.  He  himself  exercised 
the  functions  of  a  chorus-teacher  in  the  town  of  Carthaea,  in  Ceos,  and 
the  house  of  the  chorus  (xop-nyciov),  near  the  temple  of  Apollo,  was  his 
customary  abode.  This  occupation  was  to  him,  as  to  Stesichorus,  the 
origin  of  his  poetical  efforts.  He  appears,  indeed,  to  have  been  brought 
up  to  music  and  poetry  as  a  profession.  From  his  native  island  he  pro 
ceeded  to  Athens,  probably  on  the  invitation  of  Hipparchus,  who  attached 
him  to  his  society  by  great  rewards.3  After  remaining  at  Athens  for 
some  time,  probably  even  after  the  expulsion  of  Hippias,  he  went  to 
Thessaly,  where  he  lived  under  the  patronage  of  the  Aleuadae  and  Sco- 
padae.*  He  afterward  returned  to  Athens,  and  soon  had  the  noblest  op 
portunity  of  employing  his  poetic  powers  in  the  celebration  of  the  great 
events  of  the  Persian  war.  In  489  B.C.,  he  conquered  ^Eschylus  in  the 
contest  for  the  prize  which  the  Athenians  offered  for  an  elegy  on  those 
who  fell  at  Marathon.5  Ten  years  later,  he  composed  the  epigrams  which 
were  inscribed  upon  the  tomb  of  the  Spartans  who  fell  at  Thermopylae, 
as  well  as  an  encomium  on  the  same  heroes  ;6  and  he  also  celebrated  in 
verse  the  battles  of  Artemisium  and  Salamis,  and  the  great  men  who 
commanded  in  them.  He  had  completed  his  80th  year  when  his  long 
poetical  career  at  Athens  was  crowned  by  the  victory  which  he  gained 
with  the  dithyrambic  chorus,  being  the  56th  prize  which  he  had  carried 
off.7  Shortly  after  this,  he  was  invited  to  Syracuse  by  Hiero,  at  whose 
court  he  lived  until  his  death. 

Simonides  was  in  high  honor  at  Syracuse,  and  a  great  favorite  with 
Hiero,  who  treated  him  with  lavish  munificence.  He  still  continued, 
while  at  Syracuse,  to  employ  his  muse  occasionally  in  the  service  of  oth 
er  Grecian  states.  Throughout  his  whole  life  he  appears  to  have  been 
attached  to  philosophy ;  and  his  poetical  genius  is  characterized  rather 
by  versatility  and  purity  of  taste  than  by  fervid  enthusiasm.  Many  in 
genious  apophthegms  and  wise  sayings  are  attributed  to  him,  nearly  re- 

1  Smith,  I.  c.  2  Chamaslion  ap.  Athen.,  x.,  p.  456,  c. 

3  Plat.,  Hipparch.,  p.  228,  c;  JEHan,  V.  H.,viu.,  2. 

4  Theocrit.,  Id.,  xvi.,  34 ;  Cic.,  De  Orat.,  ii.,  86 ;  Stes.,  Frag.  71,  Bentl. 

5  Frag.  58,  Epig.  149.  6  Epig.  150-155,  Frag.  9.  7  Epig.  203,  204. 

F 


122  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

sembling  those  of  the  seven  sages  ;  for  example,  the  answer  to  the  ques 
tion,  What  is  God  I1  is  ascribed  both  to  him  and  to  Thales  :  in  the  one 
anecdote  the  questioner  is  Hiero,  in  the  other  Croesus.  Simonides  him 
self  is  sometimes  reckoned  among  the  philosophers,  and  the  Sophists 
considered  him  as  a  predecessor  in  their  art.  He  is  said,  moreover,  to 
have  been  the  inventor  of  the  mnemonic  art,  and  of  the  long  vowels  and 
double  letters  in  the  Greek  alphabet. 

Simonides  made  literature  a  profession,  and  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  who  took  money  for  his  poems  ;  and  the  reproach  of  avarice  is  too 
often  brought  against  him  by  his  contemporary  and  rival,  Pindar,  as  well 
as  by  subsequent  writers,  to  be  altogether  discredited.2  The  chief  char 
acteristics  of  his  poetry  were  sweetness  (whence  he  obtained  the  sur 
name  of  Mdicertes)  and  elaborate  finish,  combined  with  the  truest  poetic 
conception  and  perfect  power  of  expression,  though  in  originality  and 
fervor  he  was  far  inferior,  not  only  to  the  early  lyric  poets,  such  as  Sap 
pho  and  Alcaeus,  but  also  to  his  contemporary  Pindar.  He  was  probably 
both  the  most  prolific  and  the  most  generally  popular  of  all  the  Grecian 
lyric  poets.  Among  the  poems  which  he  composed  for  public  festivals 
were  hymns  and  prayers  (/careuxaO  to  various  gods,  paeans  to  Apollo, 
hyporchemes,  dithyrambs,  epinicia,  and  parthenia.  In  the  hyporchemes, 
Simonides  seemed  to  have  excelled  himself;  so  great  a  master  was  he 
of  the  art  of  painting,  by  apt  rhythms  and  words,  the  acts  which  he 
wished  to  describe.  His  dithyrambs  were  not,  according  to  the  original 
purpose  of  this  branch  of  composition,  dedicated  to  Bacchus,  but  admit 
ted  subjects  of  the  heroic  mythology.  His  epinicia  appear  to  have  been 
distinguished  from  those  of  Pindar  mainly  in  this,  that  the  former  dwelt 
more  upon  the  particular  victory  which  gave  occasion  to  his  song,  and 
described  all  its  details  with  great  minuteness  ;  whereas  Pindar  passes 
lightly  over  the  incident,  and  immediately  soars  into  higher  regions.3 

The  following  is  a  list  of  those  of  the  compositions  of  Simonides  of 
which  we  possess  either  the  titles  or  fragments  :  1.  A  poem,  the  precise 
form  of  which  is  unknown,  on  "  The  Empire  of  Cambyses  and  Darius" 
(T)  KanpiHTov  Kal  Aapeiou  j3a<n\efe).  2,  3.  Elegies  on  the  battles  of  Arte- 
misium  and  Salamis  (^  ev  'Apre/iicr^  j/au^ax"*'  ^  «/  2aXa/ui/i 
4.  Eulogistic  poems  in  various  metres  (ey/ctfyuo).  5.  Epinician  Odes 
VIKOI  <j55at)-  6.  Hymns  or  Prayers  (v/j.voi,  /careuxaO-  ?•  Paeans 
8.  Dithyrambs  (Sjflvpa/^Soi,  also  called  rpaytpSiai).  9.  Drinking  songs  (<TK<{- 
Aia).  10.  Parthenia  (7rap0eW).  11.  Hyporchemes  (  faopxfipafra).  12. 
Laments  (bpyvoi).  13.  Elegies  (^AeyeTai).  14.  Epigrams  (tiriypdpfw?ra, 


The  fragment  of  his  Lament  of  Danae  is  one  of  the  finest  remains  of 
Greek  lyric  poetry  that  we  possess.  The  general  character  of  the  dialect 
of  Simonides  is,  like  that  of  Pindar,  the  Epic  mingled  with  Doric  and 
^Eolic  forms.  The  fragments  of  Simonides  are  contained  in  the  chief 
collections  of  the  Greek  poets,  in  Brunck's  Analecta,  who  gives  with  them 
those  which  belonged  to  the  other  poets  of  the  same  name  ;  in  Jacobs' 

1  Czc.,  2V.  P.,  i.,  22,  2  Schneideurin,  p.  xxiv.-xxxii. 

a  Muller,  Hist.  Or.  Lit.,  p.  210.  *  Smith.  Diet,  Biog.,  x  v. 


POETICAL     PERIOD. 


123 


Anthologia  Graca;  in  Schneidewin's  standard  edition,  Brunsw.,  1835,  and 
in  his  Delectus  Poesis  Gr&corum ;  and  in  Bergk's  Poeta.  Lyrici  Greed. 

IX.  BACCHYLIDES  (BaKxvtiSrjs),  the  nephew  of  Simonides,  and,  like  him, 
a  native  of  lulis,  in  Ceos,  adhered  closely  to  the  system  and  example  of 
his  uncle.     He  flourished  about  B.C.  470,  toward  the  close  of  the  life  of 
Simonides,  with  whom  he  lived  at  the  court  of  Hiero,  in  Syracuse.     He 
wrote,  in  the  Doric  dialect,  Hymns,  Paeans,  Dithyrambs,  &c.,  but  all  his 
poems  have  perished,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  fragments,  and  two 
epigrams  in  the  Greek  Anthology.    That  his  poetry  was  but  an  imitation 
of  one  branch  of  that  of  Simonides,  cultivated  with  great  delicacy  and 
finish,  is  proved  by  the  opinions  of  ancient  critics,  among  whom  Dionysius 
adduces  perfect  correctness  and  uniform  elegance  as  the  characteristics 
of  Bacchylides.    His  genius  and  art  were  chiefly  devoted  to  the  pleasures 
of  private  life,  love  and  wine,  and,  when  compared  with  those  of  Simon 
ides,  appear  marked  by  greater  sensual  grace  and  less  moral  elevation.1 
Bacchylides,  like  Simonides,  transfers  the  diffuseness  of  the  elegy  to  the 
choral  lyric  poem,  although  he  himself  composed  no  elegies,  and  follow 
ed  the  traces  of  his  uncle  only  as  an  epigrammatist.    The  structure  of  his 
verse  is  generally  very  simple  ;  nine  tenths  of  his  odes,  to  judge  from  the 
fragments,  consisted  of  dactylic  series  and  trochaic  dipodies,  as  we  find 
in  those  odes  of  Pindar  which  were  written  in  the  Doric  mode.    We  find 
also  in  his  poems  trochaic  verses  of  great  elegance.     Like  his  predeces 
sors  in  lyric  poetry,  he  wrote  in  the  Doric  dialect,  but  frequently  intro 
duces  Attic  forms,  so  that  the  dialect  of  his  poems  very  much  resembles 
that  of  the  choruses  in  the  Attic  tragedies.2     The  fragments  of  Bacchyl 
ides  have  been  collected  by  Neue,  "  Baccliylidis  Coi  fragmenta,"  Berol., 
1823 ;  and  by  Schneidewin  and  Bergk. 

X.  The  universal  esteem  in  which  Simonides  and  Bacchylides  were 
held  in  Greece,  and  their  acknowledged  excellence  in  their  art,  did  not 
prevent  some  of  their  contemporaries  from  striking  into  various  other 
paths,  and  adopting  other  styles  of  treating  lyric  poetry.     LASUS  (AScros) 
of  Hermione,  in  Argolis,  was  a  rival  of  Simonides,  during  his  residence 
in  Athens,  and  likewise  enjoyed  high  favor  at  the  court  of  Hipparchus.3 
It  is,  however,  difficult  to  ascertain,  from  the  very  scanty  accounts  which 
we  possess  of  this  poet,  wherein  consisted  the  point  of  contrast  between 
him  and  his  competitor.     He  was  more  peculiarly  a  dithyrambic  poet, 
and  was  the  first  that  introduced  contests  in  dithyrambs  at  Athens,  prob 
ably  about  B.C.  508.     He  is  celebrated  as  the  teacher  of  Pindar.     The 
dithyrambic  style  predominated  so  much  in  his  works,  that  he  gave  to 
the  general  rhythms  of  his  odes  a  dithyrambic  turn,  and  a  free  movement, 
in  which  he  was.  aided  by  the  variety  and  flexibility  of  tone  of  the  flute, 
his  favorite  instrument.4    He  was  also  a  theorist  in  his  art,  and  investi 
gated  the  laws  of  music,  that  is,  the  relation  of  musical  intervals  to  ra 
pidity  of  movement.     Plutarch  says  that  Lasus  invented  various  new 
adaptations  of  music  to  dithyrambic  poetry,  giving  it  an  accompaniment 
of  several  flutes,  and  using  more  numerous  and  more  varied  voices. 

~>  Mutter,  p.  213.  2  Id.  ib. 

3  Aristoph.,  Vesp.,  1410.     Compare  Herod.,  viii.,  6.  *  Plut^  Mus.,  39. 


124  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Lasus  wrote  a  hymn  to  Ceres,  who  was  worshipped  at  Hermione,  in  the 
Doric  dialect,  with  the  ^Eolic  harmony,  of  which  there  are  three  lines  ex 
tant,  and  also  an  ode,  entitled  KeVraupoi,  both  of  which  pieces  were  re 
markable  for  not  containing  the  letter  2,  the  hissing  sound  of  which  he 
avoided  as  dissonant.1 

XI.  TIMOCREON  (Ttjito/cpeW),  of  Rhodes^  was  a  genius  of  an  entirely  pe 
culiar  character.    Powerful  both  as  an  athlete  and  a  poet,  he  transferred 
the  pugnacity  of  the  palaestra  to  poetry.    He  is  celebrated  for  the  bitter  and 
pugnacious  spirit  of  his  works,  and  especially  for  his  attacks  on  Themis- 
tocles  and  Simonides.    From  fragments  of  his  poetry  which  are  preserved 
by  Plutarch,2  it  appears  that  he  was  a  native  of  lalysus,  in  Rhodes,  whence 
he  was  banished  on  the  then  common  charge  of  an  inclination  toward 
Persia  (  fj.i)$i(T/j.6s)  ;  and  in  this  banishment  he  was  left  neglected  by  The- 
mistocles,  who  had  formerly  been  his  friend,  and  connected  with  him  by 
the  ties  of  hospitality.    What  made  the  cause  of  offence  greater  was,  that 
Themistocles  had  obtained  their  recall  for  other  political  fugitives.    This 
distinction  Timocreon   ascribed  to   pecuniary  corruption.      Timocreon 
seems  to  have  ridiculed  and  parodied  Simonides  on  account  of  some 
tricks  of  his  art,  as  where  the  latter  expresses  the  same  thought  in  the 
same  words,  only  transposed,  first  in  an  hexameter,  and  then  in  a  trochaic 
tetrameter.    Of  his  poetry  only  a  few  fragments  remain,  which  are  given 
in  the  collections  of  Schneidewin  and  Bergk.3 

XII.  PINDARUS  (niVSapos),  the  greatest  lyric  poet  of  Greece,  was  a  na 
tive  of  Boeotia,  but  the  ancient  biographies  leave  it  uncertain  whether  he 
was  born  at  Thebes  or  at  Cynoscephalas,  a  village  in  the  territory  of 
Thebes.     His  parents,  it  is  well  ascertained,  belonged  to  Cynoscephalae, 
and  may,  perhaps,  have  resided  at  Thebes,  which  would  serve  to  recon 
cile  the  two  accounts.     Pindar  was  born,  as  we  know  from  his  own  test 
imony,  during  the  celebration  of  the  Pythian  games.     Clinton  places  his 
birth  in  B.C.  518,  Bockh  in  B.C.  522,  but  neither  of  these  dates  is  certain, 
though  the  latter  is  perhaps  the  more  probable.     He  appears  to  have  died 
in  his  80th  year,  though  other  accounts  make  him  much  younger  at  the 
time  of  his  death.    If  he  was  born  in  B.C.  522,  his  death  would  fall  in  B.C. 
442.     He  was  in  the  prime  of  life  at  the  battles  of  Marathon  and  Salamis, 
and  was  nearly  of  the  same  age  as  the  poet  ^Eschylus.     But  the  causes 
which  determined  Pindar's  poetical  character  are  to  be  sought  in  a  period 
previous  to  the  Persian  war,  and  in  the  Doric  and  ^Eolic  parts  of  Greece 
rather  than  in  Athens  ;  and  thus  we  may  separate  Pindar  from  his  con 
temporary  yEschylus,  by  placing  the  former  at  the  close  of  the  early  pe 
riod,  the  latter  at  the  head  of  the  new  period  of  literature.* 

The  family  of  Pindar  ranked  among  the  noblest  in  Thebes.  It  was 
sprung  from  the  ancient  race  of  the  JEgidse,  who  claimed  descent  from 
Cadmus.  The  family  seems  to  have  been  celebrated  for  its  skill  in  mu 
sic,  though  there  is  no  authority  for  stating,  as  Bockh  and  Miiller  have 
done,  that  they  were  hereditary  flute-players,  and  exercised  their  profes 
sion  regularly  at  certain  great  religious  festivals.  The  ancient  biogra- 


,  p.  214  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Themist.,  21. 

3  MiUler,  p  215  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  4  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  125 

phies  relate  that  the  father  or  uncle  of  Pindar  was  a  flute-player,  and  we 
are  told  that  Pindar,  at  an  early  age,  received  instruction  in  the  art  from 
the  flute-player  Scopelinus.  But  the  youth  soon  gave  indications  of  a 
genius  for  poetry,  which  induced  his  father  to  send  him  to  Athens  to  re 
ceive  more  perfect  instruction  in  the  art ;  for  it  must  be  recollected  that 
lyric  poetry  among  the  Greeks  was  so  intimately  connected  with  music, 
dancing,  and  the  whole  training  of  the  chorus,  that  the  lyric  poet  required 
no  small  amount  of  education  to  fit  him  for  his  profession.  At  Athens 
Pindar  became  the  pupil  of  Lasus  of  Hermione,  the  founder  of  the  Athe 
nian  school  of  dithyrambic  poetry,  and  who  was  at  that  time  residing  at 
Athens,  under  the  patronage  of  Hipparchus.  He  returned  to  Thebes  be 
fore  he  had  completed  his  twentieth  year,  and  is  said  to  have  received 
instruction  there  from  Myrtis,  and  Corinna  of  Tanagra,  two  poetesses, 
who  then  enjoyed  great  celebrity  in  Bceotia.1 

Corinna  appears  to  have  exercised  considerable  influence  over  the 
youthful  poet,  and  he  was  not  a  little  indebted  to  her  example  and  pre 
cepts.  It  is  related  by  Plutarch,2  that  she  recommended  Pindar  to  intro 
duce  mythical  narrations  into  his  poems,  and  that  when,  in  accordance 
with  her  advice,  he  composed  a  hymn  (part  of  which  is  still  extant),  in 
which  he  interwove  almost  all  the  Theban  mythology,  she  smiled  and 
said,  "  We  ought  to  sow  with  the  hand,  and  not  with  the  whole  sack"  (rfj 
X^ipl  5e«/  o-Tre/peu/,  oAAa  ^77  #Aa>  T<£  frvXaKw).  With  both  these  poetesses 
Pindar  contended  for  the  prize  in  the  musical  contests  at  Thebes.  But 
Corinna  was  five  times  victorious  over  him. 

Pindar  commenced  his  professional  career  as  a  poet  at  a  very  early 
age,  and  acquired  so  great  a  reputation  that  he  was  soon  employed  by 
different  states  and  princes  in  all  parts  of  the  Hellenic  world  to  compose 
for  them  choral  songs  for  special  occasions.  He  received  money  and 
presents  for  his  works ;  but  he  never  degenerated  into  a  common  mer 
cenary  poet,  and  he  continued  to  preserve  to  his  latest  days  the  respect 
of  all  parts  of  Greece.  His  earliest  poem  which  has  come  down  to  us 
(the  10th  Pythian)  he  composed  at  the  age  of  twenty.  It  is  an  Epinician 
ode  in  honor  of  Hippocles,  a  Thessalian  youth,  belonging  to  the  powerful 
family  of  the  Aleuadae,  and  who  had  gained  the  prize  at  the  Pythian  games. 
The  next  ode  of  Pindar  in  point  of  time  is  the  6th  Pythian,  which  he  wrote 
in  his  twenty-seventh  year.  It  would  be  tedious,  however,  to  relate  at 
length  the  different  occasions  on  which  he  composed  his  other  odes.  It 
may  suffice  to  mention  that  he  composed  poems  for  Hiero,  tyrant  of  Syr 
acuse  ;  Alexander,  son  of  Amyntas,  king  of  Macedonia  ;  Theron,  tyrant 
of  Agrigentum ;  Arcesilaus  IV.,  king  of  Cyrene,  and  besides  for  many 
free  states  and  private  persons.  He  was  courted  especially  by  Alexan 
der,  king  of  Macedonia,  and  by  Hiero  of  Syracuse  ;  and  the  praises  which 
he  bestowed  upon  the  former  are  said  to  have  been  the  chief  reason  which 
led  his  descendant,  Alexander,  son  of  Philip,  to  spare  the  house  of  the 
poet  when  he  destroyed  the  rest  of  Thebes.3  About  B.C.  473,  Pindar 
visited  the  court  of  Hiero,  in  consequence  of  the  pressing  invitation  of 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  De  Glor.  Athen,,  14. 

3  Dion  Chrysost.,  Orat.  de  Regno,  ii.,  p.  25. 


126  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

that  monarch  ;  but  it  appears  that  he  did  not  remain  more  than  four  years 
at  Syracuse,  as  he  loved  an  independent  life,  and  did  not  care  to  cultivate 
the  courtly  arts  which  rendered  his  contemporary,  Simonides,  a  more 
welcome  guest  at  the  table  of  their  patron.1 

But  the  estimation  in  which  Pindar  was  held  by  his  contemporaries  is 
still  more  strikingly  shown  by  the  honors  conferred  upon  him  by  the  free 
states  of  Greece.  Although  a  Theban,  he  was  always  a  great  favorite 
with  the  Athenians,  whom  he  frequently  praised  in  his  poems,  and  whose 
city  he  often  visited.  In  one  of  his  dithyrambs2  he  called  it  "  the  support 
(epei<r^o)  of  Greece,  glorious  Athens,  the  divine  city."  The  Athenians 
testified  their  gratitude  by  making  him  their  public  guest  (irp6^vos)  and 
giving  to  him  10,000  drachmae  ;3  and  at  a  later  period  they  erected  a  stat 
ue  to  his  honor,4  but  this  was  not  done  in  his  lifetime,  as  the  pseudo- 
^Eschines  states.5  The  inhabitants  of  Ceos  employed  Pindar  to  compose 
for  them  a  Trpo^Siov,  or  processional  song,  although  they  had  two  cele 
brated  poets  of  their  own,  Bacchylides  and  Simonides.  The  Rhodians 
had  his  seventh  Olympic  ode  written  in  letters  of  gold  in  the  temple  of 
the  Lindian  Minerva.6 

Pindar's  stated  residence  was  at  Thebes,  though  he  frequently  left  home 
in  order  to  attend  the  great  public  games,  and  to  visit  the  states  and  dis 
tinguished  men  who  courted  his  friendship  and  employed  his  services. 
In  the  public  events  of  the  time  he  appears  to  have  taken  no  share.  In 
deed,  the  praises  which  he  bestowed  upon  Athens,  the  ancient  rival  of 
Thebes,  displeased  his  fellow-citizens,  who  are  said  even  to  have  fined 
him  in  consequence.  It  is  farther  stated  that  the  Athenians  paid  the 
fine,  but  the  tale  does  not  deserve  much  credit. 

The  poems  of  Pindar  show  that  he  was  penetrated  with  a  strong  relig 
ious  feeling.  He  had  not  imbibed  any  of  the  skepticism  which  began  to 
take  root  at  Athens  after  the  close  of  the  Persian  war.  The  old  myths 
were  for  the  most  part  realities  to  him,  and  he  accepted  them 'with  im 
plicit  credence,  except  when  they  exhibited  the  gods  in  a  point  of  view 
which  was  repugnant  to  his  moral  feelings  ;  and  he  accordingly  rejects 
some  tales,  and  changes  others,  because  they  are  inconsistent  with  his 
conceptions  of  the  gods.  Pindar  was  a  strict  observer  of  the  worship  of 
the  gods.  He  dedicated  a  shrine  to  the  mother  of  the  gods  near  his  own 
house  at  Thebes.7  He  also  dedicated  to  Jupiter  Ammon,  in  Libya,  a  stat 
ue  made  by  Calamis,8  and  likewise  a  statue  in  Thebes  to  Mercury  of  the 
Agora.9  He  wras  in  the  habit  of  frequently  visiting  Delphi,  and  there, 
seated  in  an  iron  chair,  which  was  reserved  for  him,  he  used  to  sing 
:  hymns  in  honor  of  Apollo.10 

The  only  poems  of  Pindar  which  have  come  down  to  us  entire  are  his 
jEpinicia,  or  triumphal  odes,  commemorating  victories  at  the  games  (eVj- 
viKia,  scil.  &ff/j.aray  from  eiri  and  1/1*77).  But  these  were  only  a  small  por 
tion  of  his  works.  Besides  his  triumphal  odes,  he  wrote  hymns  to  the 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Dithyr.,  Frag.  4. 

3  Isocr.,  irepl  avriS.,  p.  304,  ed.  Dind.  *  Pausan.,  i.,  8,  4.  b  Epist.,  4. 

e  Smith,  I.  c.  7  Pausan.,  ix.,  25,  3.  «  Id.,  ix.,  6,  1. 

9  Id.,  ix.,  17,  1.  ">  Pausan.,  x.,  24,  4. 


POETICAL     PERIOD.  127 

gods,  pceans,  dithyrambs,  prosodia,  or  processional  odes  ;  parthema,  or  songs 
of  maidens  ;  hyporchemes,  or  mimic  songs ;  scolia,  or  convivial  songs ;  threni, 
or  dirges  ;  and  encomia,  or  panegyrics  on  princes.  Of  these  we  have  nu 
merous  fragments.  Most  of  them  are  mentioned  in  the  well-known  lines 
of  Horace  :l 

Seu  per  audaces  mva  dithyrambos 

Verba  devolvit,  numerisque  fertur 
Lege  solutis : 

Seu  deos  (hymns  and  p&ans)  regesve  (encomia]  canit  deorum 

Sanguinem : 

Sive  quos  Elea  domum  reducit 

Palma  ccelestes  (Epinicia)  : 

Flebili  sponsa;  juvenemve  raptuni 

Plorat  (dirges). 

In  all  of  these  varieties  Pindar  equally  excelled,  as  we  see  from  the  nu 
merous  quotations  made  from  them  by  the  ancient  writers,  though  they 
are  generally  of  too  fragmentary  a  kind  to  allow  us  to  form  a  judgment 
respecting  them.  Our  estimate  of  Pindar  as  a  poet  must  be  formed  al 
most  exclusively  from  his  Epinicia,  which  were  all  composed,  as  already 
remarked,  in  commemoration  of  some  victory  in  the  public  games,  with 
the  exception  of  the  eleventh  Nemean,  which  was  written  for  the  instal 
lation  of  Aristagoras  in  the  office  of  Prytanis  at  Tenedos.  The  Epinicia 
are  divided  into  four  books,  celebrating  respectively  the  victories  gained 
in  the  Olympic,  Pythian,  Nemean,  and  Isthmian  games.  In  order  to  un 
derstand  them  properly,  we  must  bear  in  mind  the  nature  of  the  occasion 
for  which  they  were  composed,  and  the  object  which  the  poet  had  in  view. 
A  victory  gained  in  one  of  the  four  great  national  festivals  conferred 
honor  not  only  on  the  conqueror  and  his  family,  but  also  on  the  city  to 
which  he  belonged.  It  was  accordingly  celebrated  with  great  pomp  and 
ceremony.  Such  a  celebration  began  with  a  procession  to  a  temple,  where 
a  sacrifice  was  offered,  and  it  ended  with  a  banquet  and  the  joyous  rev 
elry  called  by  the  Greeks  K&/J.OS.  For  this  celebration  a  poem  was  ex 
pressly  composed,  which  was  sung  by  a  chorus,  trained  for  the  purpose, 
either  by  the  poet  himself,  or  some  one  acting  on  his  behalf.  The  poems 
were  sung  either  during  the  procession  to  the  temple,  or  at  the  comus  at 
the  close  of  the  banquet.2 

Those  of  Pindar's  Epinician  odes  which  consist  of  strophes  without 
epodes,  were  sung  during  the  procession,  but  the  majority  of  them  appear 
to  have  been  sung  at  the  comus.  For  this  reason,  they  partake  to  some 
extent  of  the  joyous  nature  of  the  occasion,  and  accordingly  contain  at 
times  jocularities  which  are  hardly  in  accordance  with  the  modern  no 
tions  of  lyric  poetry.  In  these  odes  Pindar  rarely  describes  the  victory 
itself,  as  the  scene  was  familiar  to  all  the  spectators,  but  he  dwells  upon 
the  glory  of  the  victor,  and  celebrates  chiefly  either  his  wealth  (o\pos)  or 
his  skill  (dper^) — his  wealth,  if  he  had  gained  the  victory  in  the  chariot- 
race,  since  it  was  only  the  wealthy  that  could  contend  for  the  prize  in 
this  contest ;  his  skill,  if  he  had  been  exposed  to  peril  in  the  encounter. 
He  frequently  celebrates,  also,  the  piety  and  goodness  of  the  victor  ;  for, 
1  Cam.,  iv.,  2.  *  Smith,  Dirt.  Biogr.,  .•?.  v. 


128  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

with  the  deep  religious  feeling  which  pre-eminently  characterizes  Pindar, 
he  believed  that  the  moral  and  religious  character  of  the  conqueror  con 
ciliated  the  favor  of  the  gods,  and  gained  for  him  their  support  and  as 
sistance  in  the  contest.  For  the  same  reason,  he  dwells  at  great  length 
upon  the  mythical  origin  of  the  person  whose  victory  he  extols,  and  con 
nects  his  exploits  with  the  similar  exploits  of  the  heroic  ancestors  of  the 
race  or  nation  to  which  he  belongs.  These  mythical  narratives  occupy  a 
very  prominent  feature  in  almost  all  of  Pindar's  odes  ;  they  are  not  intro 
duced  for  the  sake  of  ornament,  but  have  a  close  and  intimate  connection 
with  the  whole  object  and  purpose  of  each  poem,  as  is  clearly  pointed  out 
by  Dissen,  in  his  admirable  essay,  "De  Ratione  Poetica  Carminum  Pimlari- 
corum"  &c.,  prefixed  to  his  edition  of  Pindar.1 

Every  Epinician  ode  of  Pindar  has  its  peculiar  tone,  depending  upon  the 
course  of  the  ideas  and  the  consequent  choice  of  the  expressions.  The 
principal  differences  are  connected  with  the  choice  of  the  rhythms,  which 
again  is  regulated  by  the  musical  style.  According  to  the  last  distinction, 
the  epinicia  of  Pindar  are  of  three  sorts,  Doric,  JEolic,  and  Lydian,  which 
can  be  easily  distinguished,  although  each  admits  of  innumerable  varie 
ties.  In  respect  of  metre,  every  ode  of  Pindar  has  an  individual  charac 
ter,  no  two  odes  having  the  same  metrical  structure.  In  the  Doric  ode 
the  same  metrical  forms  occur  as  those  which  prevailed  in  the  choral 
lyric  poetry  of  Stesichorus,  namely,  systems  of  dactyls  and  trochaic  di- 
podiae,  which  most  nearly  approach  the  stateliness  of  the  hexameter. 
Accordingly,  a  serene  dignity  pervades  these  odes  ;  the  mythical  narra 
tions  are  developed  with  greater  fullness,  and  the  ideas  are  limited  to  the 
subject,  and  are  free  from  personal  feeling;  in  short,  their  general  char 
acter  is  that  of  calmness  and  elevation.  The  language  is  Epic,  with  a 
slight  Doric  tinge,  which  adds  to  its  brilliancy  and  dignity.2 

The  rhythms  of  the  ^Eolic  odes  resemble  those  of  the  Lesbian  poetry, 
in  which  light  dactylic,  trochaic,  or  logacedic  metres  prevailed  ;  these 
rhythms,  however,  when  applied  to  choral  lyric  poetry,  were  rendered  far 
more  various,  and  thus  often  acquired  a  character  of  greater  volubility 
and  liveliness.  The  poet's  mind  also  moves  with  greater  rapidity  ;  and 
sometimes  he  stops  himself  in  the  midst  of  narrations  which  seem  to  him 
impious  or  arrogant.  The  JEolic  odes,  moreover,  from  the  rapidity  and 
variety  of  their  movements,  have  a  less  uniform  character  than  the  Doric 
odes  ;  for  example,  the  first  Olympic,  with  its  joyous  and  glowing  images, 
is  very  different  from  the  second,  in  which  a  lofty  melancholy  is  express 
ed,  and  from  the  ninth,  which  has  an  expression  of  proud  and  complacent 
self-reliance.  The  language  of  the  JEolic  epinicia  is  also  bolder,  more 
difficult  in  its  syntax,  and  marked  by  rarer  dialectical  forms.  Lastly, 
there  are  the  Lydian  odes,  the  number  of  which  is  inconsiderable ;  their 
metre  is  mostly  trochaic,  and  of  a  particularly  soft  character,  agreeing 
with  the  tone  of  the  poetry.  Pindar  appears  to  have  preferred  the  Lydi 
an  rhythms  for  odes  which  were  destined  to  be  sung  during  a  procession 
to  a  temple  or  at  the  altar,  and  in  which  the  favor  of  the  deity  was  im 
plored  in  an  humble  spirit.3 
»  Smith,  1.  c.  2  MUller,  p.  227.  a  Id.  ib. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  129 

The  Editio  Princeps  of  Pindar  was  printed  at  the  Aldine  press  at  Venice,  in  1513,  8vo, 
without  the  scholia  ;  but  the  same  volume  contained  likewise  the  poems  of  Callimachus, 
Dionysius,  and  Lycophron.  The  second  edition  was  published  at  Rome,  by  Zacharias 
Calliergi,  with  the  scholia,  in  1515,  4to.  These  two  editions,  which  were  taken  from  dif 
ferent  families  of  manuscripts,  are  still  of  considerable  value  for  the  formation  of  the 
text.  The  other  editions  of  Pindar  published  in  the  course  of  the  sixteenth  century  were 
little  more  than  reprints  of  the  two  above  named.  The  first  edition  containing  a  new 
recension  of  the  text,  with  explanatory  notes,  a  Latin  version,  &c.,  was  that  published 
by  Erasmus  Schmidius,  Vitembergae,  1616,  4to.  Next  appeared  the  edition  of  Benedic- 
tus,  Salinurii,  1620,  4to ;  and  then  the  one  published  at  Oxford,  1697,  fol.  From  this 
time  Pindar  appears  to  have  been  little  studied,  until  Heyne  published  his  celebrated 
edition  of  the  poet  at  Gottingen,  in  1773,  4to.  A  second  and  much  improved  edition  was 
published  at  Gottingen,  in  1798-1799,  3  vols.  8vo,  containing  a  valuable  treatise  on  the 
metres  of  Pindar,  by  Hermann.  Heyne's  third  edition  was  published  after  his  death,  by 
Schafer,  Lips.,  1817,  3  vols.  8vo.  But  the  best  edition  of  Pindar  is  that  by  Bockh,  Lips., 
1811-1821,  2  vols.  4to,  which  contains  a  most  valuable  commentary,  and  dissertations, 
and  is  indispensable  to  the  student  who  wishes  to  obtain  a  thorough  insight  into  the 
musical  system  of  the  Greeks,  and  the  artistic  construction  of  their  lyric  poetry.  The 
commentary  on  the  Nemean  and  Isthmian  odes  in  this  edition  was  written  by  Dissen. 
Dissen  also  published,  in  the  Bibliotheca  Graeca,  a  smaller  edition  of  the  poet,  Gotha, 
1830,  2  vols.  8vo,  taken  from  the  text  of  Bockh,  with  a  most  valuable  explanatory  com 
mentary.  This  edition  is  the  most  useful  to  the  student  from  its  size,  though  it  does  not 
supersede  that  of  Bockh.  A  second  edition  of  Dissen's,  by  Schneidewin,  appeared,  Go 
tha,  1843,  seq.  There  is  also  a  valuable  edition  of  Pindar  by  Fr.  Thiersch,  Lips.,  1820, 
2  vols.  8vo,  with  a  German  translation,  and  an  important  introduction  ;  and  a  very  use 
ful  one  by  Cookesley,  Etonae,  1851,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  text  of  the  poet  is  given  with  great 
accuracy  by  Bergk,  in  his  Poetce  Lyrici  Graeci.1 


CHAPTER  XX. 

THIRD  OR  EARLY  PROSAIC  PERIOD. 
INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS. 

I.  THE  third  period  of  Greek  literature  is  also  denominated  the  early 
prosaic  one,  and,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  begins,  in  fact,  before  the 
full  termination  of  the  preceding  one,  with  the  first  attempts  at  prose 
composition,  and  extends  to  and  includes  the  era  of  Herodotus.     In  con 
sidering  this  period,  it  will  be  necessary  to  distinguish  between  the  philo 
sophical  and  historical  writers  ;  and  as  prose  writing,  according  to  some, 
originated  among  the  former,  we  will  consider  them  first  in  order,  although 
some  of  the  writers  to  be  mentioned  by  us  in  this  enumeration  will  be 
found  to  have  written  in  philosophic  verse,  not  in  prose.     Our  object  in 
making  mention  of  these  writers  is  to  give  a  continuous  view  of  early 
Greek  philosophy. 

I.  EARLIER  GREEK  PHILOSOPHY.2 

II.  Philosophy,  for  some  time  after  its  origin  in  Greece,  was  as  far 
removed  from  the  ordinary  thoughts,  occupations,  and  amusements  of  the 
people,  as  poetry  was  intimately  connected  with  them.    Poetry  ennobles 
and  elevates  all  that  is  characteristic  of  a  nation  ;  its  religion,  mythology, 
political  and  social  institutions,  and  manners.     Philosophy,  on  the  other 
hand,  begins  by  detaching  the  mind  from  the  opinions  and  habits  in  which 
it  has  been  bred  up ;  from  the  national  conceptions  of  the  gods  and  the 

1  Smith,  1.  c,  a  MiMer.  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  239,  *rW 


130 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


universe ;  and  from  the  traditionary  maxims  of  ethics  and  politics.  The 
philosopher  attempts,  as  far  as  possible,  to  think  for  himself;  and  hence 
he  is  led  to  disparage  all  that  is  handed  down  from  antiquity.  Hence, 
too,  the  Greek  philosophers  from  the  beginning  generally  renounced  the 
ornaments  of  verse ;  that  is,  of  the  vehicle  which  had  been  previously 
used  for  the  expression  of  every  elevated  feeling. 

III.  Philosophical  writings  were  nearly  the  earliest  compositions  in  the 
unadorned  language  of  common  life.     It  is  not  probable  that  they  would 
have  been  composed  in  this  form  if  they  had  been  intended  for  recital  to 
a  multitude  assembled  at  games  and  festivals.     It  would  have  required 
great  courage  to  break  in  upon  the  rhythmical  flow  of  the  euphonious 
hexameter  and  lyric  measures,  with  a  discourse  uttered  in  the  language 
of  ordinary  conversation. 

IV.  The  most  ancient  writings  of  Greek  philosophers  were,  however, 
only  brief  records  of  their  principal  doctrines,  designed  to  be  imparted  to 
a  few  persons.     There  was  no  reason  why  the  form  of  common  speech 
should  not  be  used  for  these,  as  it  had  long  before  been  used  for  laws, 
treaties,  and  the  like.     In  fact,  prose  composition  and  writing  are  so  in 
timately  connected,  that  we  may  venture  to  assert  that,  if  writing  had 
become  common  among  the  Greeks  at  an  earlier  period,  poetry  would  not 
have  so  long  retained  its  ascendency.    We  shall,  indeed,  find  that  philos 
ophy,  as  it  advanced,  sought  the  aid  of  poetry,  in  order  to  strike  the  mind 
more  forcibly  ;  but  this  philosophical  poetry  may,  without  any  impropriety, 
be  classed  with  prose  composition,  as  being  a  limited  and  peculiar  devia 
tion  from  the  usual  practice  with  regard  to  philosophical  writings. 

V.  However  the  Greek  philosophers  may  have  sought  after  originality 
and  independence  of  thought,  they  could  not  avoid  being  influenced  in 
their  speculations  by  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  their  position.    Hence 
the  earliest  philosophers  may  be  classed  according  to  the  races  and  coun 
tries  to  which  they  belonged ;  the  idea  of  a  school  (that  is,  of  a  transmis 
sion  of  doctrines  through  an  unbroken  series  of  teachers  and  disciples) 
not  being  applicable  to  this  period. 

VI.  The  earliest  attempts  at  philosophical  speculation  were  made  by 
the  lonians  ;  that  race  of  the  Greeks  which  not  only  had,  in  common  life, 
shown  the  greatest  desire  for  new  and  various  kinds  of  knowledge,  but 
had  also  displayed  the  most  decided  taste  for  scientific  researches  into  the 
phenomena  of  external  nature.    From  this  direction  of  their  inquiries,  the 
Ionic  philosophers  were  called  by  the  ancients  "  physical  philosophers," 
or  "  physiologers."    With  a  boldness  characteristic  of  inexperience  and  ig 
norance,  they  began  by  directing  their  inquiries  to  the  most  abstruse  sub 
jects  ;  and,  unaided  by  any  experiments  which  were  not  within  the  reach 
of  a  common  man,  and  unacquainted  with  the  first  elements  of  mathe 
matics,  they  endeavored  to  determine  the  origin  and  principle  of  the  ex 
istence  of  all  things.1 

VII.  If  we  are  tempted  to  smile  at  the  temerity  with  which  the  lonians 
at  once  ventured  upon  the  solution  of  the  highest  problems,  we  are,  on 
the  other  hand,  astonished  at  the  sagacity  with  which  many  of  them  con- 

i  Miiller,  p.  240. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  131 

jectured  the  connection  of  appearances,  which  they  could  riot  fully  com 
prehend  without  a  much  greater  progress  in  the  study  of  nature.  The 
scope  of  these  Ionian  speculations  proves  that  they  were  not  founded  on 
h  priori  reasonings,  independent  of  experience.  The  Greeks  were  always 
distinguished  by  their  curiosity  and  their  powers  of  delicate  observation. 
Yet  this  gifted  nation,  even  when  it  had  accumulated  a  large  stock  of 
knowledge  concerning  natural  objects,  seems  never  to  have  attempted 
more  than  the  observation  of  phenomena  which  presented  themselves 
unsought,  and  never  to  have  made  experiments  devised  by  the  investi 
gator. 

VIII.  PHERECYDES  (^epe/cuSTjs),1  a  native  of  Syros,  one  of  the  Cyclades, 
deserves  mention  before  we  pass  to  the  individual  philosophers  of  the 
Ionic  school  (taking  the  term  in  its  most  extended  sense),  because  he 
forms  an  intermediate  link  between  the  sacerdotal  enthusiasts,  Epimeni- 
des,  Abaris,  and  others,  and  the  Ionic  physiologers.     He  is,  according  to 
some,  the  earliest  Greek  of  whose  prose  writings  we  possess  any  remains, 
and  was  certainly  one  of  the  first  who,  after  the  manner  of  the  lonians 
(before  they  had  obtained  any  papyrus  from  Egypt),  wrote  down  their  un 
polished  wisdom  upon  sheep-skins.    But  his  prose  is  only  so  far  prose,  that 
it  has  cast  off  the  fetters  of  verse,  and  not  because  it  expresses  the  ideas 
of  the  writer  in  a  simple  and  perspicuous  manner.    His  ideas  and  language 
closely  resembled  those  of  the  Orphic  theologers,  and  he  ought  rather  to 
be  classed  with  them  than  with  the  Ionic  philosophers.     He  maintained 
that  there  were  three  principia  (Zeus  or  ^Ether,  Chthona  or  Chaos,  and 
Cronos  or  Time),  and  four  elements  (fire,  earth,  air,  and  water),  from 
which  were  formed  every  thing  that  exists.     Pherecydes  lived  about  B. 
C.  544. 2    According  to  some,  he  was  not  the  first  who  wrote  any  thing  in 
prose,  this  honor  being  reserved  for  Cadmus  of  Miletus,  but  merely  the 
first  who  employed  prose  in  the  explanation  of  philosophical  questions. 

IX.  THALES  (0oAf)s),  of  Miletus,3  was  the  first  in  the  series  of  the  Ionic 
physical  philosophers.     He  was  born,  according  to  Apollodorus,  in  the 
35th  Olympiad,  and  lived  in  the  age  of  the  Seven  Sages,  one  of  whom  he 
himself  wras.     These  seven  sages  were  not  solitary  thinkers,  whose  re 
nown  for  wisdom  was  acquired  by  speculations  unintelligible  to  the  mass 
of  the  people ;  their  fame,  on  the  contrary,  which  extended  over  all  Greece, 
was  founded  solely  on  their  acts  as  statesmen,  counsellors  of  the  people 
in  public  affairs,  and  practical  men.     This  is  also  true  of  Thales,  whose 
sagacity  in  affairs  of  state  and  public  economy  appears  from  many  anec 
dotes.    Thales  is  also  said  to  have  predicted  the  eclipse  of  the  sun,  which 
happened  in  the  reign  of  the  Lydian  king  Alyattes,  B.C.  609  ;*  and,  under 
Croesus,  to  have  managed  the  diversion  of  the  course  of  the  Halys.5    For 
calculating  the  eclipse  in  question,  he  doubtless  employed  astronomical 
formulae,  which  he  had  obtained,  through  Asia  Minor,  from  the  Chaldaeans, 
the  fathers  of  Grecian,  and,  indeed,  of  all  ancient  astronomy ;  for  his  own 
knowledge  of  mathematics  could  not  have  reached  as  far  as  the  Pytlia- 

1  Muller,  p.  240,  seq.  2  Diog.  Laert.,  i.,  121 ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biagr.,  s.  v. 

3  Mutter,  p.  241  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

1   Oltmann,  Abhandl.  der  Kdnigf.  Akad.  der  Wins,  in  Berlin,  1812, 1813.          s  Heiod.,  i.,  75 


132 


G  R  E  E  K     LITERATURE. 


gorean  theorem.  He  is  said  to  have  been  the  first  teacher  of  such  prob 
lems  as  that  of  the  equality  of  the  angles  at  the  base  of  an  isosceles  tri 
angle.  In  the  main,  the  tendency  of  Thales  was  practical ;  and,  when 
his  own  knowledge  was  insufficient,  he  applied  the  discoveries  of  nations 
more  advanced  than  his  own  in  natural  science.  Thus  he  was  the  first 
who  advised  his  countrymen,  when  at  sea,  not  to  steer  by  the  Great  Bear, 
which  forms  a  considerable  circle  around  the  pole,  but  to  follow  the  ex 
ample  of  the  Phoenicians  (from  whom,  according  to  Herodotus,  the  family 
of  Thales  was  descended),  and  to  take  the  Lesser  Bear  for  their  polar 
star.1 

Thales  was  not  a  poet,  nor,  indeed,  the  author  of  any  written  work,  and, 
consequently,  the  accounts  of  his  doctrine  rest  only  upon  the  testimony 
of  his  contemporaries  and  immediate  successors  ;  so  that  it  would  be  vain 
to  attempt  to  construct  from  them  a  system  of  natural  philosophy  accord 
ing  to  his  own  notions.  It  may,  however,  be  collected  from  these  tradi 
tions  that  he  considered  all  nature  as  endowed  with  life.  "  Every  thing," 
he  said,  "  is  full  of  gods  ;"2  and  he  cited,  as  proofs  of  this  opinion,  the  mag 
net  and  amber,  on  account  of  their  magnetic  and  electrical  properties.3 
It  also  appears  that  he  considered  water  as  a  general  principle  or  cause  of 
things.  What  may  have  led  him  to  this  last  opinion  was,  according  to 
Aristotle,  that  the  fruit  and  seeds  of  things  are  moist,  and  that  warmth 
is  developed  out  of  moistness.  What  we  have  here  said  is  sufficient  to 
show  that  Thales  broke  through  the  common  prejudices  produced  by  the 
impressions  of  the  senses,  and  sought  to  discover  the  principle  of  ex 
ternal  forms  in  moving  powers  which  lie  beneath  the  surface  of  appear 
ances.4 

X.  ANAXIMANDER  ('Ai/a^aj/Spos),5  also  a  Milesian,  is  next  after  Thales, 
whose  pupil  he  is  said  to  have  been.  He  was  born  B.C.  610. 6  It  seems 
pretty  certain  that  his  little  work  "upon  nature"  (irepl  ^uo-ews),  as  the 
books  of  the  Ionic  physiologers  were  mostly  called,  was  written  in  B.C. 
547,  when  he  was  sixty-three  years  old.  This  may  be  said  to  be  the 
earliest  philosophical  work  (strictly  so  termed)  in  the  Greek  language ; 
for  we  can  scarcely  give  that  name  to  the  mysterious  revelations  of 
Pherecydes.  It  was  probably  written  in  a  style  of  extreme  conciseness, 
and  in  language  more  befitting  poetry  than  prose,  as  indeed  appears  from 
the  few  extant  fragments.  The  astronomical  and  geographical  explana 
tions  attributed  to  Anaximander  were  probably  contained  in  this  work. 
Anaximander  possessed  a  gnomon,  or  sun-dial,  which  he  had  doubtless 
obtained  from  Babylon  ;7  and,  being  at  Sparta  (which  was  still  the  focus 
of  Greek  civilization),  he  made  observations,  by  which  he  determined  ex 
actly  the  solstices  and  equinoxes,  and  calculated  the  obliquity  of  the 
ecliptic.  According  to  Eratosthenes,  he  was  the  first  who  attempted  to 
draw  a  map  ;  in  which  his  object  probably  was  rather  to  make  a  mathe 
matical  division  of  the  whole  earth,  than  to  lay  down  the  forms  of  the 
different  countries  composing  it. 

1  Muller,  1.  c.  2  Aristot.,  De  Anima,  i.,  5.  3  /#.  ^  ?  i<?  2. 

4  Miiller,  I.  c. ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.       5  Muller,  p.  242  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 
e  Apollud.  ap.  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  1,  2.  ^  Plin.,  H.  N.,  ii.,  8  ;  Herod.,  ii.,  109. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  133 

According  to  Aristotle,1  Anaximander  thought  that  there  were  innu 
merable  worlds,  which  he  called  gods ;  supposing  these  worlds  to  be  beings 
endowed  with  an  independent  power  of  motion.  He  also  thought  that 
existing  worlds  were  always  perishing,  and  that  new  worlds  were  always 
springing  into  being ;  so  that  motion  was  perpetual.  According  to  his 
views,  these  worlds  arose  out  of  the  eternal,  or,  rather,  indeterminable 
substance,  which  he  called  TO  faetpov ;  he  arrived  at  the  idea  of  an  orig 
inal  substance,  out  of  which  all  things  arose,  and  to  which  all  things  re 
turn,  by  excluding  all  attributes  and  limitations. 

XI.  ANAXIMENES  ('Ava^ifjievTjs),2  another  Milesian,  according  to  the  gen 
eral  tradition  of  antiquity,  was  third  in  the  series  of  Ionic  philosophers. 
With  both  Thales  and  Anaximander  he  had  personal  intercourse ;  for, 
besides  the  common  tradition,  which  makes  him  a  disciple  of  the  latter, 
Diogenes  Laertius3  quotes  at  length  two  letters  said  to  have  been  writ 
ten  to  Pythagoras  by  Anaximenes ;  in  one  of  which  he  gives  an  account 
of  the  death  of  Thales,  speaking  of  him  with  reverence  as  the  first  of 
philosophers,  and  as  having  been  his  own  teacher.     In  the  other  he  con 
gratulates  Pythagoras  on  his  removal  to  Crotona  from  Samos,  while  he 
was  himself  at  the  mercy  of  the  tyrants  of  Miletus,  and  was  looking  for 
ward  with  fear  to  the  approaching  war  with  the  Persians,  in  which  he 
foresaw  that  the  lonians  must  be  subdued.     There  is  no  safe  testimony 
as  to  the  exact  period  of  the  birth  and  death  of  Anaximenes  ;  but  since 
there  is  sufficient  evidence  that  he  was  the  teacher  of  Anaxagoras,  B.C. 
480,  and  he  was  in  repute  in  B.C.  544,  he  must  have  lived  to  a  great  age.4 

*Like  the  other  early  Greek  philosophers,  he  employed  himself  in  spec 
ulating  upon  the  origin,  and  accounting  for  the  phenomena  of  the  uni 
verse  ;  and  as  Thales  held  water  to  be  the  material  cause  out  of  which 
the  world  was  made,  so  Anaximenes  considered  air  to  be  the  first  cause 
of  all  things,  the  primary  form,  as  it  were,  of  matter,  into  which  the  other 
elements  of  the  universe  were  resolvable.5  The  elementary  principle  of 
the  lonians  was  always  considered  as  having  an  independent  power  of 
motion,  and  as  endowed  with  certain  attributes  of  the  divine  essence.6 
Hence  it  appears  that  Anaximenes,  like  his  predecessors,  held  the  eter 
nity  of  matter :  nor,  indeed,  does  he  seem  to  have  believed  in  the  exist 
ence  of  any  thing  immaterial ;  for  even  the  human  soul,  according  to  his 
theory,  is,  like  the  body,  formed  of  air;7  and  he  saw  no  necessity  for 
supposing  an  Agent  in  the  work  of  creation,  since  he  held  that  motion 
was  a  natural  and  necessary  law  of  the  universe.8 

XII.  A  person  of  far  greater  importance  in  the  history  of  Greek  philos 
ophy,  and  especially  of  Greek  prose,  is  HERACLITUS  ('Hpa/cAen-os),9  of  Eph- 
esus.     The  time  when  he  flourished  is  ascertained  to  be  about  the  69th 
Olympiad,  or  B.C.  505. 10     After  travelling  extensively  in  his  youth,  he 

1  Aristot.,  Phys.,  Hi.,  4.  2  Mutter,  p.  243  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  3,  seqq. 

4  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  645  ;  Cic.,  N.  D.,  i.,  11 ;  Ongen,  vol.  iv.,  p.  238 ;  Philol.  Museum,  vol. 
i.,  p.  86,  seqq.  5  Aristot.,  Metaph.,  i.,  3.  6  Stobaeus,  Eclog.,  p.  296. 

7  Plut.,  De  Plac.  Phil,  i.,  3.  8  Smith,  I.  c. 

9  Mutter,  p.  244  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

10  Diog.  Laert.,  ix.,  1.     Clinton  (F.  H.,  vol.  a.)  places  him  under  B.C.  513. 


134  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

appears  to  have  led  the  life  of  a  complete  recluse,  and  at  last  to  have  re 
treated  to  the  mountains,  where  he  lived  on  pot-herbs ;  but,  after  some 
time,  he  was  compelled,  by  the  sickness  consequent  on  such  meagre  diet, 
to  return  to  Ephesus,  where  he  died.  The  common  story,  that  he  was 
continually  shedding  tears  on  account  of  the  vices  and  follies  of  mankind, 
is  as  little  entitled  to  sober  belief  as  that  of  the  perpetually-laughing  De- 
mocritus. 

The  philosophical  system  of  Heraclitus  was  contained  in  a  work  which 
received  various  titles  from  the  ancients,  of  which  the  most  common  is 
TTfpl  (pixrecas.  Some  fragments  of  it  remain,  and  have  been  collected  and 
explained  by  Schleiermacher,  in  Wolf  and  Buttmann's  Museum  dcr  Alter- 
thumwissenschaft.'1  From  the  obscurity  of  his  style,  Heraclitus  gained  the 
title  of  ffKOT€iv6s,  and  with  his  predilection  for  this  method  of  writing 
was  probably  connected  his  aristocratic  pride  and  hauteur  (whence  he 
was  called  o%A.oAoft>opos),  his  tenacious  adherence  to  his  own  views, 
which,  according  to  Aristotle,  had  as  much  weight  with  him  as  science 
itself,2  his  contempt  for  the  opinions  of  previous  writers,  and  the  well- 
known  melancholy  of  his  disposition,  whence  originated  the  story  al 
ready  alluded  to  of  his  weeping  for  the  follies  and  vices  of  mankind.3 
With  regard,  however,  to  his  obscurity,  we  must  also  take  into  account 
the  cause  assigned  for  it  by  Hitter,  that  the  oldest  philosophical  prose  must 
have  been  rude  and  loose  in  its  structure  ;  and  since  it  had  grown  out  of 
a  poetical  style,  would  naturally  have  recourse  to  figurative  language.4 

The  cardinal  doctrine  of  his  natural  philosophy  seems  to  have  been, 
that  every  thing  is  in  perpetual  motion,5  that  nothing  has  any  stable  'or 
permanent  existence,  but  that  every  thing  is  assuming  a  new  form  or 
perishing.  Seeking  in  natural  phenomena  for  the  principle  of  this  per 
petual  motion,  Heraclitus  supposed  it  to  be  fire,6  but  by  fire  he  meant  only 
a  clear  light  fluid,  self-kindled  and  self-extinguished,  and  therefore  not 
differing  materially  from  the  air  of  Anaximenes.  Thus,  then,  the  world 
is  formed,  "  not  made  by  God  or  man,"  but  simply  evolved  by  a  natural 
operation  from  fire,  which,  also,  is  the  human  life  and  soul,  and,  there 
fore,  a  rational  intelligence  guiding  the  whole  universe.  With  his  phys 
ical  theories  his  moral  ones  were  closely  connected.  Thus,  he  accounted 
for  a  drunkard's  incapacity  by  supposing  him  to  have  a  wet  soul ;  and  he 
even  pushed  this  so  far  as  to  maintain  that  the  soul  is  wisest  where  the 
land  and  climate  are  driest,  which  would  acc'ount  for  the  mental  great 
ness  of  the  Greeks.  He  held  man's  soul  to  be  a  portion  of  the  divine 
fire,  though  degraded  by  its  migration  to  earth ;  and  he  considered  the 
eyes  more  trustworthy  than  the  ears,  as  revealing  to  us  the  knowledge 
of  fire. 

The  Greek  epistles  bearing  the  name  of  Heraclitus,  published  in  the 
Aldine  collection  of  Greek  letters,  Rome,  1499,  and  Geneva,  1606,  and 
also  in  the  edition  of  Eunapius,  by  Boissonade,  p.  425,  are  the  invention 
of  some  later  writer. 

1  Vol.  i.,  part  3.  2  Aristot.,  Eth.  Nic.,  vii.,  5.  3  Juv.,  Sat.,  x.,  34. 

*  Ritter,  Gesch.  der  Phil,  vol.  i.,  p.  267,  seqq.  *  Muller,  I.  c. 

6  Maxim.  Tyr,,  Diss.,  xxv.,  p.  260. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  135 

XIII.  ANAXAGORAS  (3A.^ay6pas)1  of  Clazomeme,  in  Ionia,  was  born  about 
B.C.  499.  He  is  said  to  have  gone  to  Athens  at  the  age  of  twenty,  dur 
ing  the  contests  of  the  Greeks  with  Persia,  and  to  have  lived  and  taught 
in°that  city  for  a  period  of  thirty  years.  He  became  here  the  intimate 
friend  and  teacher  of  the  most  eminent  men  of  the  time,  such  as  Euripi 
des  and  Pericles ;  but,  while  he  thus  gained  the  friendship  and  admira 
tion  of  the  most  enlightened  Athenians,  the  majority,  uneasy  at  being  dis 
turbed  in  their  hereditary  superstitions,  soon  found  reasons  for  complaint. 
The  principal  cause  of  hostility  toward  him  must,  however,  be  looked  for 
in  the  following  circumstance.  As  he  was  a  friend  of  Pericles,  the  party 
which  was  dissatisfied  with  the  administration  of  the  latter  seized  upon 
the  disposition  of  the  people  toward  the  philosopher  as  a  favorable  oppor 
tunity  for  striking  a  blow  at  the  great  statesman.  Anaxagoras,  therefore, 
was  accused  of  impiety,  and  it  was  only  owing  to  the  influence  and  elo 
quence  of  Pericles  that  he  was  not  put  to  death.  He  was  sentenced, 
however,  to  pay  a  fine  of  five  talents,  and  to  quit  Athens.  The  philoso 
pher  now  went  to  Lampsacus,  and  during  his  residence  here  a  charge  of 
M7?8ta>i<k,  or  partiality  to  Persia,  was  brought  against  him  at  Athens,  in 
consequence  of  which  he  was  condemned  to  death.  He  is  said  to  have 
received  the  intelligence  of  his  sentence  with  a  smile,  and  to  have  died 
at  Lampsacus,  at  the  age  of  seventy-two.2 

The  treatise  on  Nature  by  Anaxagoras  (which  was  written  late  in  life) 
was  in  the  Ionic  dialect,  and  in  prose,  after  the  example  of  Anaximenes. 
We  have  copious  fragments  remaining  of  it,  consisting  of  quotations 
made  from  it  by  later  writers,  such  as  Plato,  Aristotle,  Plutarch,  Dioge 
nes  Laertius,  Cicero,  and  others.  These  fragments  exhibit  short  sen 
tences  connected  by  particles  (as,  and,  but,  for),  without  long  periods.  But 
though  his  style  was  loose,  his  reasoning  was  compact  and  well  arranged. 
His  demonstrations  were  synthetic,  not  analytic,  that  is  to  say,  he  sub 
joined  the  proof  to  the  proposition  to  be  proved,  instead  of  arriving  at  his 
result  by  a  process  of  inquiry.3 

The  Ionic  philosophers  had  endeavored  to  explain  nature  and  its  vari 
ous  phenomena  by  regarding  matter  in  its  different  forms  and  modifica 
tions  as  the  cause  of  all  things.  Anaxagoras,  on  the  other  hand,  con 
ceived  the  necessity  of  seeking  a  higher  cause,  independent  of  matter, 
and  this  cause  he  considered  to  be  vovs,  that  is,  mind,  thought,  or  intelli 
gence.  This  vovs,  however,  is  not  the  creator  of  the  wrorld,  but  merely 
that  which  originally  arranged  the  world  and  gave  motion  to  it ;  for,  ac 
cording  to  the  axiom  that  out  of  nothing  nothing  can  come,  he  supposed 
the  existence  of  matter  from  all  eternity,  though,  before  the  vovs  was  ex 
ercised  upon  it,  it  was  in  a  chaotic  confusion.  In  this  original  chaos  there 
was  an  infinite  number  of  homogeneous  parts  (o^oio^uepr)),  as  well  as  het 
erogeneous  ones.  The  vovs  united  the  former,  and  separated  from  them 
what  was  heterogeneous,  and  out  of  this  process  arose  the  things  we  see 
in  this  world.  This  union  and  separation,  however,  were  made  in  such 
a  manner  that  each  thing  contains  in  itself  parts  of  other  things  or  hete 
rogeneous  elements,  and  is  wrhat  it  is  only  on  account  of  the  preponder- 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. ;  Midler,  p.  246.  2  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  3,  seqq.  3  Miiller,  I.  r.. 


136  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ance  of  certain  homogeneous  parts  which  constitute  its  character.1  An- 
axagoras  thus  adopted  the  doctrine  of  atoms,  and  excluded  the  idea  of 
creation  from  his  explanation  of  nature.  No  doctrine  of  his,  however, 
gave  so  much  offence,  or  was  considered  so  clear  a  proof  of  his  atheism, 
as  his  opinion  that  the  sun,  the  bountiful  god  Helios,  who  shines  upon 
both  mortals  and  immortals,  was  a  mass  of  red-hot  iron.  How  startling 
must  these  opinions  have  appeared  at  a  time  when  the  people  were  ac 
customed  to  consider  nature  as  pervaded  by  a  thousand  divine  powers ! 
And  yet  these  new  doctrines  rapidly  gained  the  ascendency,  in  spite  of 
all  the  opposition  of  religion,  poetry,  and  even  the  laws  which  were  in 
tended  to  protect  the  ancient  customs  and  opinions.  A  hundred  years 
later,  Anaxagoras,  with  his  doctrine  of  vovs,  appeared  to  Aristotle  a  sober 
inquirer,  compared  with  the  wild  speculators  who  preceded  him  ;  although 
Aristotle  was  aware  that  his  applications  of  his  doctrines  were  unsatis 
factory  and  defective.2 

The  fragments  of  Anaxagoras  have  been  collected  by  Schaubach,  An- 
axagorce  Fragmenta  collegit,  &c.,  Leipzig,  1827,  8vo,  and  much  better  by 
Sehorn,  Anaxagora  Fragmenta,  dispos.  et  illustr.,  &c.,  Bonn,  1829,  8vo. 

XIV.  DIOGENES  APOLLONIATES3  (Atoyfvrjs  6  'ATroAA.awarTjs),  a  native  of 
Apollonia,  in  Crete,  was  not  equal  in  importance  to  Anaxagoras,  but  is 
still  too  considerable  a  writer  upon  physical  subjects  to  be  here  passed 
over  in  silence.     Without  being  either  the  disciple  or  the  teacher,  he 
was  a  contemporary  of  Anaxagoras  ;  and  in  the  direction  of  his  studies  he 
closely  followed  Anaximenes,  expanding  the  main  doctrines  of  this  phi 
losopher  rather  than  establishing  new  principles  of  his  own.     He  wrote 
a  work  in  the  Ionic  dialect,  entitled  Trepi  4>v0-e<ws,  "  Upon  Nature"  (a  com 
mon  title  with  the  Ionic  philosophers,  as  we  have  already  seen),  which 
consisted  of  at  least  two  books,  and  in  which  he  appears  to  have  treated 
of  physical  science  in  the  largest  sense  of  the  words.     Of  this  work  only 
a  few  short  fragments  remain,  preserved  by  Aristotle,  Diogenes  Laertius, 
and  Simplicius. 

Diogenes,  like  Anaxagoras,  lived  at  Athens,  and  is  said  to  have  been 
exposed  to  similar  dangers.4  He  maintained  that  air  was  the  primal  ele 
ment  of  all  things  ;  that  there  was  an  infinite  number  of  worlds,  and  an 
infinite  void  ;  that  air,  densified  and  rarefied,  produced  the  different  mem 
bers  of  the  universe ;  that  nothing  was  produced  from  nothing,  or  was 
reduced  to  nothing ;  that  the  earth  was  round,  supported  in  the  middle, 
and  had  received  its  shape  from  the  whirling  round  of  the  warm  vapors, 
and  its  concretion  and  hardening  from  cold.  He  also  imputed  to  air  an 
intellectual  energy,  though  without  recognizing  any  distinction  between 
mind  and  matter.5 

The  fragments  of  Diogenes  have  been  collected  and  published,  with 
those  of  Anaxagoras,  by  Sehorn,  Bonn,  1829,  8vo,  and  alone  by  Panzer- 
beiter,  Leipzig,  1830,  8vo,  with  a  copious  dissertation  on  his  philos 
ophy. 

XV.  A  third  Ionic  physical  philosopher  of  this  time,  ARCHELAUS  ('A.px*- 

1  Smith,  1.  c.  2  Muller,  I.  c.  3  Midler,  p.  248 ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

4  Diaz.  Latrt.,  ix.,  57.  5  Id.  ib. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  137 

Aaos)  of  Miletus,1  who  followed  the  manner  of  Anaxagoras,  is  chiefly  im 
portant  from  having  established  himself  permanently  at  Athens.  It  is 
evident  that  these  men  were  not  drawn  to  Athens  by  any  prospect  of 
benefit  to  their  philosophical  pursuits ;  for  the  Athenians  at  that  time 
showed  a  disinclination  to  such  studies,  which  they  ridiculed  under  the 
name  of  meteor  osophy,  and  even  made  the  subject  of  persecution.  It  was 
undoubtedly  the  power  which  Athens  had  acquired  as  the  head  of  the 
confederates  against  Persia,  and  the  oppression  of  the  states  of  Asia  Mi 
nor,  which  drove  these  philosophers  from  Clazomenae  and  Miletus  to  the 
independent,  wealthy,  and  flourishing  Athens.  And  thus  these  political 
events  contributed  to  transfer  to  Athens  the  last  efforts  of  Ionic  philoso 
phy,  which  the  Athenians  at  first  rejected  as  foreign  to  their  modes  of 
thinking,  but  which  they  afterward  understood  and  appreciated,  and  used 
as  a  foundation  for  more  extensive  and  accurate  investigations  of  their 
own.2 

XVI.  But  before  Athens  had  reached  this  pre-eminence  in  philosophy, 
the  spirit  of  speculation  was  awakened  in  other  parts  of  Greece,  and  had 
struck  into  new  paths  of  inquiry.     The  Eleatics  afford  a  remarkable  in 
stance  of  independent  philosophical  research  at  this  period  ;  for,  although 
lonians  by  descent,  they  departed  very  widely  from  their  countrymen  on 
the  coast  of  Asia  Minor.     Elea  (afterward  Velia,  according  to  the  Roman 
pronunciation)  was  a  colony  founded  in  Italy  by  the  Phocaeans,  when,  from 
a  noble  love  of  freedom,  they  had  delivered  up  their  country  in  Asia  Minor 
to  the  Persians,  and  had  been  forced,  by  the  enmity  of  the  Etruscans  and 
Carthaginians,  to  abandon  their  first  settlement  in  Corsica ;  which  hap 
pened  about  B.C.  536.     The  three  most  eminent  philosophers  of  the  Ele- 
atic  school  were  Xenophanes,  Parmenides,  and  Zeno.3 

XVII.  XENOPHANES*  (Eei>o(/>ai/T]s),  a  native  of  Colophon,  and  who  flour 
ished  between  the  60th  and  70th  Olympiads,5  was  concerned  in  the  colo 
nizing  of  Elea,  and  lived  at  least  for  some  time  in  that  place.     He  had 
quitted  Colophon  as  a  fugitive  or  exile.     Xenophanes  was  a  poet  in  ear 
lier  life,  and  did  not  attach  himself  to  philosophy  until  he  had  settled  at 
Elea.     But  even  as  a  philosopher  he  retained  the  poetic  form  of  compo 
sition  :  his  work  upon  nature  was  written  in  epic  language  and  metre,  and 
he  himself  recited  it  at  public  festivals  after  the  manner  of  a  rhapsodist. 
Xenophanes,  from  the  first,  adopted  a  different  principle  from  that  of  the 
Ionic  physical  philosophers  ;  for  he  proceeded  upon  an  ideal  system,  while 
their  system  was  exclusively  founded  upon  experience.     He  began  with 
the  idea  of  the  godhead,  and  showed  the  necessity  of  conceiving  it  as  an 
eternal  and  unchanging  existence.     The  lofty  idea  of  an  everlasting  and 
immutable  God,  who  is  all  spirit  and  mind,  was  described  in  his  poem  as 
the  only  true  knowledge.     Xenophanes  was  universally  regarded  by  an 
tiquity  as  the  originator  of  the  Eleatic  doctrine  of  the  oneness  of  the  uni 
verse.6     The  deity  was,  in  his  view,  the  animating  power  of  the  universe, 


1  Hitter  and  others  incline  to  regard  him  as  a  native  of  Athens,  considering  the  fact 
as  nearly  established  on  the  authority  of  Simplicius.  We  have  preferred,  however,  fol 
lowing  the  common  account  with  Miiller.  2  Miiller,  p.  249.  3  Id.  ib. 

*  Id., p.  250.          s  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.          6 piat.,  Soph.,?.  242 ;  Aristot,  Met.,  ii.,  5. 


138 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


which  is  expressed  by  Aristotle  in  the  words  that,  directing  his  glance  on 
the  whole  universe,  Xenophanes  said,  "  God  is  the  One."1 

The  fragments  of  Xenophanes  have  been  collected  by  Karsten  :  " Xen- 
ophanis  Colophonii  Carminum  Rdiquia"  &c.,  Bruxell,  1830. 

XVIII.  Xenophanes  was  followed  by  PARMENIDES*  (riap/tej'tSrjs)  of  Elea. 
According  to  Plato,  Parmenides,  at  the  age  of  sixty-five,  came  to  Athens 
to  the  Panathenaea,  accompanied  by  Zeno,  then  forty  years  old,  and  be 
came  acquainted  with  Socrates,  who  at  that  time  was  quite  young.     Sup 
posing  Socrates  to  have  been  nineteen  or  twenty  years  of  age  at  the  time, 
we  may  place  the  visit  of  Parmenides  to  Athens  in  B.C.  448,  and,  conse 
quently,  his  birth  in  513.3     Parmenides  was  regarded  with  great  esteem 
by  Plato*  and  Aristotle  ;5  and  his  fellow-citizens  thought  so  highly  of  him, 
that  every  year  they  bound  their  magistrates  to  render  obedience  to  the 
laws  which  he  had  enacted  for  them.6    The  philosophical  opinions  of  Par 
menides  were  developed  in  a  didactic  poem  in  hexameter  verse,  entitled 
irepl  &6<r€ws,7  of  which  only  fragments  remain.     In  this  poem  he  main 
tained  that  the  phenomena  of  sense  were  delusive,  and  that  it  was  only 
by  mental  abstraction  that  a  person  could  attain  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
only  reality,  a  One  and  All,  a  continuous  and  self-existent  substance, 
which  could  not  be  perceived  by  the  senses.     But,  although  he  believed 
the  phenomena  of  sense  to  be  delusive,  he  nevertheless  adopted  two  ele 
ments,  Warm  and  Cold,  or  Light  and  Darkness.8     The  best  edition  of  the 
fragments  of  Parmenides  is  by  Karsten.     It  forms  the  second  part  of  the 
first  volume  of  Pkilosaphorum  Grcecorum  Veterum  Oper.  Reliquia,  Amstd., 
1835. 

XIX.  ZENO  (Z.-f)V(ov),  of  Elea,  was  the  favorite  disciple  of  Parmenides. 
He  was  born  about  B.C.  488,  and  at  the  age  of  forty  accompanied  Par 
menides  to  Athens.     He  appears  to  have  resided  some  time  at  this  latter 
place.     Zeno  developed  the  doctrines  of  Parmenides  in  a  prose  work,  in 
which  his  chief  object  was  to  justify  the  disjunction  of  philosophical  spec 
ulation  from  the  ordinary  modes  of  thought.     This  he  did  by  showing  the 
absurdities  involved  in  the  doctrines  of  variety,  of  motion,  and  of  crea 
tion,  opposed  to  that  of  an  all-comprehending  substance.9 

XX.  Before  we  turn  from  the  Eleatics  to  those  other  philosophers  of 
Italy,  to  whom  the  name  of  Italic  has  been  appropriated,  we  must  notice 
a  Sicilian,  who  is  so  peculiar  both  in  his  personal  qualities  and  his  philo 
sophical  doctrines,  that  he  can  not  be  classed  with  any  sect,  although  his 
opinions  were  influenced  by  those  of  the  lonians,  the  Eleatics,  and  the 
Pythagoreans.    EMPEDOCLESI()  ('E^Tre&o/cXrjs)  of  Agrigentum,  in  Sicily,  flour 
ished  about  B.C.  444.     He  was  held  in  high  honor  by  his  countrymen  of 
Agrigentum,  and  also  apparently  by  the  other  Doric  states  of  Sicily.     He 
reformed  the  constitution  of  his  native  city  by  abolishing  the  oligarchical 


Aristot.,  I.  c.     Compare  Tirnon  ap.  Sext.  Emp.  Pyrrh.  Hyp.,  i.,  224. 

Miiller,  p.  251  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

Plat.,  Parmen.,  p.  127,  B ;  Id.,  Soph.,  p.  217,  G. 

Id.,  Thecet.,  p.  183,  E;  Soph.,  p.  237. 

Aristot.,  Metaph.,  A.  5,  p.  986 ;  Phys.  Anscult.,  i.,  23. 

Diog.  Laert..  ix.,  23.     Compare  Strab.,  vi.,  p.  252.         ''  Pluf..  DF  Pyth.  Orac.,  p.  402. 

Smith.  I.e.  9  Milller,  p.  253.  "'  I  biff..  I.e.;  Smith,  Diet.  Bioffr.,  s.  v. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  139 

council  of  the  Thousand  ;  which  measure  gave  such  general  satisfaction, 
that  the  people  are  said  to  have  offered  him  the  regal  authority.1  The 
fame  of  Empedocles  was,  however,  principally  acquired  by  improvements 
which  he  made  in  the  physical  condition  of  large  tracts  of  country.  He 
destroyed  the  pestiferous  exhalations  of  the  marshes  about  Selinus,  by 
carrying  two  small  streams  through  the  swampy  grounds,  and  thus  drain 
ing  off  the  water.  In  other  places  he  blocked  up  some  narrow  valleys 
with  large  constructions,  and  thus  screened  a  town  from  the  noxious  winds 
which  blew  into  it,  by  which  he  earned  to  himself  the  title  of  "  wind 
averter"  (KwAutraj/e'/xas).2  It  is  probable  that  Empedocles  did  not  conceal 
his  consciousness  of  possessing  extraordinary  intellectual  powers,  so  that 
we  need  not  wronder  at  his  having  been  considered  by  his  countrymen  in 
Sicily  as  a  person  endowed  with  supernatural  and  prophetic  gifts. 

The  works  of  Empedocles  were  all  in  verse.  The  two  most  important 
were  a  didactic  poem  on  nature  (irepl  $u<rea>s),  of  which  considerable  frag 
ments  are  extant,  and  a  poem  entitled  KaQap/noi,  which  seems  to  have 
recommended  good  moral  conduct  as  the  means  of  averting  epidemics 
and  other  evils.  Lucretius,  the  greatest  of  all  didactic  poets,  speaks  of 
Empedocles  with  enthusiasm,  and  evidently  makes  him  his  model.  Em 
pedocles  was  acquainted  with  the  theories  of  the  Eleatics  and  the  Pytha 
goreans  ;  but  he  did  not  adopt  the  fundamental  principles  of  either  school, 
although  he  agreed  with  the  latter  in  his  belief  in  the  migration  of  souls, 
and  in  a  few  other  points.  With  the  Eleatics  he  agreed  in  thinking  that 
it  was  impossible  to  conceive  any  thing  arising  out  of  nothing.  Emped 
ocles  first  established  the  number  of  four  elements,  which  he  called  the 
roots  of  things.3 

The  first  comprehensive  collection  of  the  fragments  of  Empedocles  was 
made  by  Sturz,  Empedocles  Agrigentinus,  Lips.,  1805.  Karsten  also  has 
greatly  distinguished  himself  for  what  he  has  done  for  the  criticism  and 
explanation  of  the  text,  as  well  as  for  the  light  he  has  thrown  on  separate 
doctrines.  (Philosophorum  Gracorum  veterum  Reliquiae,  vol.  ii.)  A  col 
lection  of  the  Fragments  by  Stein,  Bonn,  1852,  has  also  appeared. 

XXI.  We  now  turn  to  that  class  of  ancient  philosophers  which  in 
Greece  itself  was  called  the  Italic  ;*  the  most  obscure  region  of  the  Greek 
philosophy,  as  we  have  no  accounts  of  individual  writings,  and  scarcely 
even  of  individual  writers,  belonging  to  it.  The  most  conspicuous  name 
here  is  that  of  Pythagoras,  which  will  alone  occupy  our  attention.  PY 
THAGORAS*  (Uuflc^pas)  was  a  native  of  Samos.6  The  date  of  his  birth  is 
uncertain,  but  all  authorities  agree  that  he  flourished  in  the  times  of  Polyc- 
rates  and  Tarquinius  Superbus  (B.C.  540-510). 7  He  studied  in  his  own 
country  under  Creophilus,  Pherecydes  of  Syros,  and  others,  and  is  said 
to  have  visited  Egypt  and  many  countries  of  the  East  for  the  purpose  of 
acquiring  knowledge.  We  have  not  much  trustworthy  evidence  either 
as  to  the  kind  and  amount  of  knowledge  which  he  acquired,  or  as  to  his 

1  J)iag.  Laert.,  viii.,  63,  seqq.         2  Id.,\iii.,  60,  70,  69  :  Plut.,  De  Curios.  Princ.,  p.  515. 
3  Milller,  I.  c. ;  Smith,  I.  c.  *  Mutter,  p.  255. 

5  Id.  ib. ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  .v.  v.  6  Isocr^  Busir.,  p.  227,  cd.  Sttpk. 

7  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  10-21. 


140 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


definite  philosophical  views.  It  is  certain,  however,  that  he  believed  in 
the  transmigration  of  souls.1  He  is  also  said  to  have  discovered  the 
propositions  that  the  triangle  inscribed  in  a  semicircle  is  right-angled, 
and  that  the  square  of  the  hypotenuse  of  a  right-angled  triangle  is  equal 
to  the  sum  of  the  squares  on  the  sides.2  Discoveries  in  astronomy  are 
also  attributed  to  him ;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  he  paid  great  at 
tention  to  arithmetic,  and  its  application  to  weights,  measures,  and  the 
theory  of  music.3 

Apart  from  all  direct  testimony,  however,  it  may  safely  be  affirmed, 
that  the  very  remarkable  influence  exerted  by  Pythagoras,  and  even  the 
fact  that  he  was  made  the  hero  of  so  many  marvellous  stories,  prove  him 
to  have  been  a  man  both  of  singular  capabilities  and  of  great  acquire 
ments.  It  may  also  be  affirmed  with  safety  that  the  religious  element 
was  the  predominant  one  in  the  character  of  Pythagoras,  and  that  relig 
ious  ascendency,  in  connection  with  a  certain  mystic  religious  system, 
was  the  object  which  he  chiefly  labored  to  secure.  It  was  this  religious 
element  which  made  the  profoundest  impression  upon  his  contemporaries. 
They  regarded  him  as  standing  in  a  peculiarly  close  connection  with  the 
gods.  The  Crotoniats  even  identified  him  with  the  Hyperborean  Apollo.* 
And,  without  viewing  liim  as  an  impostor,  we  may  easily  believe  that  he 
himself,  to  some  extent,  shared  the  same  views.  He  pretended  to  divina 
tion  and  prophecy  ;5  and  he  appears  as  the  revealer  of  a  mode  of  life 
calculated  to  raise  his  disciples  above  the  level  of  mankind,  and  to  rec 
ommend  them  to  the  favor  of  the  gods.6 

When  we  come  to  inquire  what  were  the  philosophical  or  religious 
opinions  held  by  Pythagoras  himself,  we  are  met  at  the  outset  by  the  diffi 
culty  that  even  the  authors  from  whom  we  have  to  draw  possessed  no  au 
thentic  records  bearing  upon  the  age  of  Pythagoras  himself.  If  Pythag 
oras  ever  wrote  any  thing,  his  writings  perished  with  him,  or  not  long 
after.  The  probability  is  that  he  wrote  nothing.7  Every  thing  current 
under  his  name  in  antiquity  was  spurious.  It  is  all  but  certain  that  Phil- 
olaus  was  the  first  who  published  the  Pythagorean  doctrines,  at  any  rate 
in  a  written  form.  Still,  there  was  so  marked  a  peculiarity  running 
through  the  Pythagorean  philosophy,  that  there  can  be  but  little  question 
as  to  the  germs  of  the  system  having,  at  any  rate,  been  derived  from  Py 
thagoras  himself.8  Pythagoras  resembled  the  philosophers  of  the  Ionic 
school,  who  undertook  to  solve,  by  means  of  a  single  primordial  principle, 
the  vague  problem  of  the  origin  and  constitution  of  the  universe  as  a 
whole.  His  predilection  for  mathematical  studies  led  him  to  trace  the 
origin  of  all  things  to  number,  his  theory  being  suggested,  or  at  all  events 
confirmed,  by  the  observation  of  various  numerical  relations,  or  analogies 
to  them,  in  the  phenomena  of  the  universe. 

Musical  principles  likewise  played  almost  as  important  a  part  in  the 

Diog.  Laert.,  viii.,  36;  Pausan.,  ii.,  17.  2  Diog.  Laert.,  viii.,  12. 

Id.  ib. ;  Plin.,  H.  N.,  ii.,  8.        *  Porph.,  Vit.  Pythag.,  20  ;  Iamb.,  Vit.  Pythag.,  31, 140. 

Cic.,  I)e  Divin.,  i.,  3,  46  ;  Porph.,  1.  c.,  29.  6  GrotCj  Hist.  Gr.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  129. 

Compare  Pint.,  De  Alex,  fort.,  p.  329 ;  Porph.,  I.  c.,  57. 

Brandts,  Gesch.  der  Griech.  Rom.  Philos.,  p.  442. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  141 

Pythagorean  system  as  mathematical  or  numerical  ideas.  We  find  run 
ning  through  the  entire  system  the  idea  that  order,  or  harmony  of  rela 
tion,  is  the  regulating  principle  of  the  whole  universe.  The  intervals  be 
tween  the  heavenly  bodies  were  supposed  to  be  determined  according  to 
the  laws  and  relations  of  musical  harmony.1  Hence  arose  the  celebrated 
doctrine  of  the  harmony  of  the  spheres  ;  for  the  heavenly  bodies,  in  their 
motion,  could  not  but  occasion  a  certain  sound  or  note,  depending  on  their 
distances  and  velocities ;  and  as  these  were  determined  by  the  laws  of 
harmonical  intervals,  the  notes  altogether  formed  a  regular  musical  scale 
or  harmony.  This  harmony,  however,  we  do  not  hear,  either  because  we 
have  been  accustomed  to  it  from  the  first,  and  have  never  had  an  oppor 
tunity  of  contrasting  it  with  stillness,  or  because  the  sound  is  so  power 
ful  as  to  exceed  our  capacities  for  hearing.2 

The  ethics  of  the  Pythagoreans  consisted  more  in  ascetic  practice  and 
in  maxims  for  the  restraint  of  the  passions,  especially  of  anger,  and  the 
cultivation  of  the  power  of  endurance,  than  in  scientific  theory.  What 
of  the  latter  they  had  was,  as  might  be  expected,  intimately  connected 
with  their  number- theory.3  Happiness  consisted  in  the  science  of  the 
perfection  of  the  virtues  of  the  soul,  or  in  the  perfect  science  of  numbers.* 
Likeness  to  the  Deity  was  to  be  the  object  of  all  our  endeavors,5  man 
becoming  better  as  he  approaches  the  gods,  who  are' the  guardians  and  the 
guides  of  men.6  Great  importance  was  attached  to  the  influence  of  mu 
sic  as  a  means  of  controlling  the  force  of  the  passions.7  Self-examina 
tion  was  strongly  insisted  upon.8  The  transmigration  of  souls  was 
viewed  apparently  in  the  light  of  a  process  of  purification.  Souls  under 
the  dominion  of  sensuality  either  passed  into  the  bodies  of  animals,  or, 
if  incurable,  were  thrust  down  into  Tartarus,  to  meet  with  expiation  or 
condign  punishment.  The  pure  were  exalted  to  higher  modes  of  life, 
and  at  last  attained  to  incorporeal  existence.9  As  regards  the  fruits  of 
this  system  of  training  or  belief,  it  is  interesting  to  remark,  that  wherever 
we  have  notices  of  distinguished  Pythagoreans,  we  usually  hear  of  them 
as  men  of  great  uprightness,  conscientiousness,  and  self-restraint,  and  as 
capable  of  devoted  and  enduring  friendship. 

II.    EARLIER     GREEK     HISTORIANS.10 

I.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  a  nation  so  intellectual  and  cultivated  as 
the  Greeks  should  have  been  so  long  without  feeling  the  want  of  a  cor 
rect  record  of  its  transactions  in  war  and  peace. 

II.  From  almost  the  earliest  times,  the  East  appears  to  have  had  its 
annals  and  chronicles,  whereas  the  Greeks,  on  the  other  hand,  evinced 
a  careless  and  nearly  infantine  indifference  about  the  registering  of  pass- 

1  Nicom.,  Harm.,  i.,  p.  6 ;  ii.,  33  ;  Plin.,  H.  N.,  ii.,  20. 

2  Aristot.,  De  Ccelo,  ii.,  9  ;  Porph.  in  Harm.  Ptol.,  4,  p.  257. 

3  Aristot.,  Eth.  Mag.,  i.,  1  ;  Eth.  Nic.,  i.,  4 ;  ii.,  5. 

*  Clem.  Alex.,  Strom.,  ii.,  p.  417 ;  Theodoret.,  Serm.,  xi.,  p.  165. 

5  Stob.,  Ed.  Eth.,  p.  64.  6  Piut^  De  Def_  QT.,  p.  413 

7  Pint.,  De  Is.  et  Os.,  p.  384  ;  Porph.,  Vit.  Pyth.,  30.  8  Cic.,  De  Sen.,  11. 

9  Aristot.,  De  An.,  i.,  2,  3  ;  Herod.,  ii.,  123  ;  Diog.  Laert.,  viii.,  31. 

10  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  258,  seqq. 


142 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


ing  events,  almost  to  the  time  when  they  became  one  of  the  great  na 
tions  of  the  world,  and  waged  mighty  wars  with  the  ancient  kingdoms 
of  the  East.  The  celebration  of  a  by-gone  age,  which  imagination  had 
decked  with  all  its  charms,  engrossed  the  attention  of  the  Hellenic  race, 
and  prevented  them  from  dwelling  on  more  recent  events.  Besides  this, 
the  division  of  the  nation  into  numerous  small  states,  and  the  republican 
form  of  the  governments,  prevented  a  concentration  of  interests  on  par 
ticular  events  and  persons. 

III.  No  action,  no  event,  before  the  great  conflict  between  Greece  and 
Persia,  could  be  compared  in  interest  with  those  great  exploits  of  the 
Mythical  Age,  in  which  heroes  from  all  parts  of  Greece  were  supposed 
to  have  had  a  share ;   certainly  none  made  so  pleasing  an  impression 
upon  all  hearers.     The  Greeks  required  that  a  work  read  in  public,  and 
designed  for  general  instruction  and  entertainment,  should  impart  un 
mixed  pleasure  to  the  mind ;  but,  owing  to  the  dissensions  between  the 
Greek  republics,  their  historical  traditions  could  not  but  offend  some,  if 
they  flattered  others.     In  short,  it  was  not  till  a  late  period  that  the 
Greeks  outgrew  their  poetical  mythology,  and  considered  contemporary 
events  as  worthy  of  being  thought  of  and  written  about. 

IV.  From  this  cause,  the  history  of  many  transactions  prior  to  the 
Persian  war  has  perished ;  but  then,  without  its  influence,  Greek  litera 
ture  could  never  have  become  what  it  was.     Greek  poetry,  by  its  pure 
ly  fictitious  character,  and  its  freedom  from  the  shackles  of  particular 
truths,  acquired  that  general  probability,  on  account  of  which  Aristotle 
considers  poetry  as  more  philosophical  than  history.     Greek  art,  like 
wise,  from  the  lateness  of  the  period  at  which  it  descended  from  the  ideal 
representation  of  gods  and  heroes  to  the  portraits  of  real  men,  acquired 
a  nobleness  and  beauty  of  form  which  it  could  never  have  otherwise  at 
tained.     And,  in  fine,  the  intellectual  culture  of  the  Greeks  in  general 
would  not  have  taken  its  liberal  and  elevated  turn,  if  it  had  not  rested  on 
a  poetical  basis. 

V.  Writing  was  probably  known  in  Greece  some  centuries  before  the 
time  of  Cadmus  of  Miletus,  the  earliest  Greek  historian  ;l  but  it  had  not 
been  employed  for  the  purpose  of  preserving  any  detailed  historical  rec 
ord.     The  lists  of  the  Olympic  victors,  and  of  the  kings  of  Sparta  and  the 
prytanes  of  Corinth,  which  the  Alexandrean  critics  considered  sufficient 
ly  authenticated  to  serve  as  the  foundation  of  the  early  Greek  chronology; 
ancient  treaties  and  other  contracts,  which  it  was  important  to  perpetu 
ate  in  precise  terms  ;  determinations  of  boundaries,  and  other  records  of 
a  like  description,  formed  the  first  rudiments  of  a  documentary  history. 
Yet  this  was  still  very  remote  from  a  detailed  chronicle  of  contemporary 
events.     And  even  when,  toward  the  end  of  the  age  of  the  Seven  Sages, 
some  writers  of  historical  narratives  in  prose  began  to  appear  among  the 
lonians  and  the  other  Greeks,  they  did  not  select  domestic  and  recent 
events.     Instead  of  this,  they  began  with  accounts  of  distant  times  and 
countries,  and  gradually  narrowed  their  view  to  a  history  of  the  Greeks 

1  Compare  the  opinions  of  Wolf  and  Nitzsch  on  this  subject,  in  relation  to  the  Homer 
ic  controversy,  as  already  given  by  us,  p.  32,  34,  of  the  present  work. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  143 

of  recent  times.  So  entirely  did  the  ancient  Greeks  believe  that  the  daily 
discussion  of  common  life  and  oral  tradition  were  sufficient  records  of 
the  events  of  their  own  time  and  country. 

VI.  The  lonians,  who  throughout  this  period  were  the  daring  innova 
tors  and  indefatigable  discoverers  in  the  field  of  intellect,  took  the  lead  in 
history.     They  were  also  the  first  who,  satiated  with  the  childish  amuse 
ment  of  mythology,  began  to  turn  their  keen  and  restless  eyes  on  all 
sides,  and  to  seek  new  matter  for  thought  and  composition.     The  loni 
ans  had  a  peculiar  delight  in  varied  and  continuous  narration.     Nor  is  it 
to  be  overlooked  that  the  first  Ionian  who  is  mentioned  as  a  historian 
was  a  Milesian.     Miletus,  the  birth-place  of  the  earliest  philosophers ; 
flourishing  by  its  industry  and  commerce ;  the  centre  of  the  political 
movements,  produced  by  the  spirit  of  Ionian  independence  ;  and  the  spot 
in  which  the  native  dialect  was  first  formed  into  written  Greek  prose, 
was  evidently  fitted  to  be  the  cradle  of  historical  composition  in  Greece. 
If  the  Milesians  had  not,  together  with  their  neighbors  of  Asia  Minor,  led 
a  life  of  too  luxurious  enjoyment ;  if  they  had  known  how  to  retain  the 
severe  manners  and  manly  character  of  the  ancient  Greeks  in  the  midst 
of  the  refinements  and  excitements  of  later  times,  it  is  probable  that  Mi 
letus,  and  not  Athens,  would  have  been  the  teacher  of  the  world. 

VII.  CADMUS  (Kafytos),  of  Miletus,  is  mentioned  as  the  earliest  historian, 
and,  together  with  Pherecydes  of  Syros,  whom  we  have  already  treated  of, 
as  the  earliest  writer  of  prose.    It  remains  an  unsettled  point  which  of  the 
two  was  the  earliest  prose  writer,  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  fact 
that  Cadmus  wTas  the  earliest  Greek  historian.     There  is  every  probabil 
ity  that  he  lived  about  B.C.  540. l     He  wrote  a  history  of  the  foundation 
of  Miletus,  embracing  the  earliest  history  of  Ionia  generally,  in  four  books 
(Krlffis  Mi\^rov  Kid  rys  fays  'lea/las).     The  subject  of  this  history  lay  in 
the  dim  period,  from  which  only  a  few  oral  traditions  of  an  historical 
kind,  but  intimately  .connected  with  mythical  notions,  had  been  preserved. 
The  genuine  work  of  Cadmus  seems  to  have  been  lost  at  a  very  early 
period,  for  the  book  that  bore  his  name  in  the  time  of  Dionysius  of  Hali- 
carnassus  (that  is,  in  the  Augustan  Age)  was  considered  a  forgery. a   When 
Suidas  and  others3  call  Cadmus  of  Miletus  the  inventor  of  the  alphabet, 
this  statement  must  be  regarded  as  the  result  of  a  confusion  between  the 
mythical  Cadmus,  who  emigrated  from  Phoenicia  into  Greece,  and  the 
writer  under  consideration. 

VIII.  ACUSILAUS  ( 'AKouo-iAaos),4  of  Argos,  is  the  next  historian  in  order 
of  time.     Although  by  descent  a  Dorian,  he  wrote  his  history  in  the  Ionic 
dialect,  because  the  lonians  were  the  founders  of  the  historical  style.    He 
probably  lived  in  the  latter  half  of  the  sixth  century  B.C.    Acusilaus  con 
fined  his  attention  to  the  mythical  period.     His  object  was  to  collect  into 
a  short  and  connected  narrative  all  the  events  from  the  period  of  chaos 
to  the  end  of  the  Trojan  wrar.     It  was  said  of  him  that  he  translated 
Hesiod  into  prose,  an  expression  which  serves  to  characterize  his  work. 
He  appears,  however,  to  have  related  many  legends  differently  from 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Dion.  Hal.,  Jud.  de  Thucyd.,  23. 

3  Bekker,  AneaL,  p.  781.  4  Afiiller,  p.  261. 


144  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Hesiod,  and  in  the  tone  of  the  Orphic  theologers  of  his  own  time.  The 
fragments  of  Acusilaus  have  been  published  by  Sturz,  Geree,  1787,  3d 
ed.,  Lips.,  1824  ;  and  also  in  the  Museum  Criticum,  vol.  i.,  p.  216,  seqq., 
Camb.,  1826  ;  and  in  Didot's  Fragmenta  Histor.  Grcec.,  by  C.  and  T.  Miil- 
ler,  vol.  i.,  p.  100,  seqq.,  Paris,  1841. 

IX.  HECATAEUS  ('E/coTaTos)1  of  Miletus,  the  Ionian,  was  a  man  of  a  very 
different  character  of  mind  from  the  preceding.     He  belonged  to  a  very 
ancient  and  illustrious  family.    We  have  only  a  few  particulars  of  his  life. 
In  B.C.  500  he  endeavored  to  dissuade  his  countrymen  from  revolting 
from  the  Persians ;  and  when  this  advice  was  disregarded,  he  gave  them 
some  sensible  counsel  respecting  the  conduct  of  the  war,  which  was  also 
neglected.     Previous  to  this,  Hecataeus  had  visited  Egypt  and  many 
other  countries.     He  survived  the  Persian  wars,  and  appears  to  have 
died  about  B.C.  476. 2     Hecataeus  wrote  two  works :  1.  UepioSos  yrjs,  or 
Uepi-f]jr](ris,  divided  into  two  parts,  one  of  which  contained  a  description 
of  Europe,  and  the  other  of  Asia,  Egypt,  and  Libya.     Both  parts  were 
subdivided  into  smalle*  sections,  which  are  sometimes  quoted  under  their 
respective  names,  such  as  Hellespontus,  &c.     2.  TcveaXoyicu,  or  'la-roplat, 
in  four  books,  containing  an  account  of  the  poetical  fables  and  traditions 
of  the  Greeks.     His  work  on  geography  was  the  more  important,  as  it 
embodied  the  results  of  his  numerous  travels.    Herodotus  knew  the  works 
of  Hecataeus,  and  frequently  controverts  his  opinions.     Hecataeus  wrote 
in  the  Ionic»dialect,  in  a  pure  and  simple  style,  which  sometimes  became 
animated  through  the  vividness  of  his  descriptions.     The  fragments  of 
his  works  have  been  collected  by  Clausen,  Hecatcei  Milesii  Fragmenta,  Ber 
lin,  1831,  and  are  also  given  in  Didot's  Fragmenta  Histor.  Grcec.,  by  C.  and 
T.  Miiller,  vol.  i.,  p.  1,  seqq.,  Paris,  1841. 

X.  PHERECYDES  (*epe/cu5?7s)  of  Leros,  a  small  island  near  Miletus,  also 
wrote  on  genealogies  and  mythical  history,  but  did  not  extend  his  labors 
to  geography  and  ethnography.     He  is  sometimes  called  the  Athenian, 
from  having  spent  the  greater  part  of  his  life  at  Athens.3     He  flourished 
about  the  time  of  the  Persian  war.     His  writings  comprehended  a  great 
portion  of  the  mythical  traditions ;  and,  in  particular,  he  gave  a  copious 
account,  in  a  separate  work,  of  the  ancient  times  of  Athens.     He  was 
much  consulted  by  the  later  mythographers,  and  his  numerous  fragments 
must  still  serve  as  the  basis  of  many  mythological  inquiries.     By  follow 
ing  a  genealogical  line,  he  was  led  from  Philaeus,  the  son  of  Ajax,  down 
to  Miltiades,  the  founder  of  the  sovereignty  in  the  Chersonesus.    He  thus 
found  an  opportunity  of  describing  the  campaign  of  Darius  against  the 
Scythians,  concerning  which  we  have  a  valuable  fragment  of  his  history.* 
The  fragments  of  Pherecydes  have  been  collected  by  Sturz,  Pherecydis 
Fragmenta,  Lips.,  1824,  2d  ed. ;  and  they  are  also  given  in  Didot's  Frag 
menta  Histor.  Grac.,  by  C.  and  T.  Miiller,  vol.  i.,  p.  70,  seqq.,  Paris,  1841. 

XI.  CHARON  (Xdpcav).5  a  native  of  Lampsacus,  a  Milesian  colony,  also 
belongs  to  this  generation,  although  he  mentioned  some  events  which  fell 

1  Miiller,  p.  261.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Vossius,  De  Hist.  Greeds,  p.  24,  ed.  Westermann. 

*  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Miiller,  p.  263.  s  Miiller,  p.  263. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  145 

in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes,  B.C.  465. 1  Charon  continued 
the  researches  of  Hecataeus  into  Eastern  ethnography.  He  wrote  (as  was 
the  custom  of  these  early  historians)  separate  works  upon  Persia,  Libya, 
Ethiopia,  &c.  He  also  subjoined  the  history  of  his  own  time,  and  he  pre 
ceded  Herodotus  in  narrating  the  events  of  the  Persian  war,  although 
Herodotus  nowhere  mentions  him.  From  the  fragments  of  his  writings 
which  remain,  it  is  manifest  that  his  relation  to  Herodotus  was  that  of 
a  day  chronicler  to  a  historian,  under  whose  hands  every  thing  acquires 
life  and  character.  Charon  wrote,  besides,  a  chronicle  of  his  own  coun 
try,  as  several  of  the  early  historians  did,  who  were  thence  called  Horog- 
raphers  ( 'Clpoypafyoi).  The  fragments  of  Charon,  together  with  those  of 
Hecateeus  and  Xanthus,  have  been  published  by  Creuzer,  Hist.  Grac.  An- 
tiquiss.  Fragmenta,  Heidelb.,  1806,  8vo,  and  also  in  Didot's  Fragm.  Histor. 
Grcec.,  by  C.  and  T.  Miiller,  vol.  i.,  p.  32,  scqq.,  Paris,  1841. 

XII.  HELLANICUS  ('EXXaviKosY  °f  Mytilene,  in  the  island  of  Lesbos,  was 
almost  a  contemporary  of  Herodotus,  since  we  know  that  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Peloponnesian  war  he  was  sixty-five  years  old,3  and  still  continued 
to  write.  The  character  of  Hellanlcus  as  a  mythographer  and  historian 
is  essentially  different  from  that  of  the  early  chroniclers,  such  as  Acu- 
silaus  and  Pherecydes.  He  has  far  more  the  character  of  a  learned  com 
piler,  whose  object  is  not  merely  to  note  down  events,  but  to  arrange  his 
materials,  and  to  correct  the  errors  of  others.  Besides  a  number  of 
writings  upon  particular  legends  and  local  fables,  he  composed  a  work  en 
titled  "  the  Priestesses  of  Juno  of  Argos,"  in  which  the  women  who  had 
filled  this  priesthood  were  enumerated  up  to  a  very  remote  period  (on  no 
better  authority  than  of  certain  obscure  traditions),  and  various  striking 
events  of  the  heroic  times  were  arranged  in  chronological  order,  accord 
ing  to  this  series.  Another  work,  the  Carneonica  (Kap^eoi/T/ccu),  contained 
a  list  of  the  victors  in  the  musical  and  poetical  contests  of  the  Carnea  at 
Sparta.  It  was,  therefore,  one  of  the  first  attempts  at  literary  history. 
Hellanicus  was  a  very  prolific  writer,  and,  if  we  were  to  look  upon  all  the 
titles  that  have  come  down  to  us  as  titles  of  genuine  productions  and  dis 
tinct  works,  their  number  would  amount  to  nearly  thirty.  But  the  recent 
investigations  of  Preller*  have  shown  that  several  works  bearing  his  name 
are  spurious  and  of  later  date,  and  that  many  others,  which  are  referred 
to  as  separate  works,  are  only  chapters  or  sections  of  other  productions. 
Among  the  works  deemed  spurious,  we  may  mention  the  accounts  of 
Phoenicia,  Persia,  and  Egypt,  and  also  a  description  of  a  journey  to  the 
oracle  of  Jupiter  Ammon.  Thucydides5  charges  Hellanicus  with  want 
of  accuracy  in  chronology.  In  his  geographical  view,  also,  he  seems  to 
have  been  greatly  dependent  upon  his  predecessors,  and  gave,  for  the 
most  part,  what  he  found  in  them.  But  the  centre  for  falsehood,  and 
the  like,  bestowed  on  him  by  such  writers  as  Ctesias,6  Theopompus,7 
Ephorus,8  and  Strabo,9  is  evidently  one-sided,  and  should  not  bias  us  in 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. ;  Plut.,  Themist.,  2?.  2  Miiller,  p.  264. 

3  Pamphila  a,p.  Gell.,  xv.,  23.  *  De  Hellanico  Lesbio  Historico,  Dorpat,  1840,  4to. 

5  Tkucyd.,  i.,  97.        6  Ctes.  ap.  Phot.,Bibl.  Cod.,  72.        1  Theopomp.  ap.  Strab.,  p.  43. 
8  Ephor.  ap.  Joseph,  c.  Apion.,  i.,  3.          9  Strab.,  x.,  p.  541 ;  xi.,  p.  508 ;  xiii.,  p.  602. 

K 


146  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

forming  our  judgment  of  his  merits  or  demerits  as  a  writer ;  for  there  can 
be  no  doubt  that  he  was  a  learned  and  diligent  compiler,  and  that,  so  far 
as  his  sources  went,  he  was  a  trustworthy  one.  The  fragments  of  Hellani- 
cus  have  been  collected  by  Sturz,  Hellanici  Leslii  Fragmenta,  Lips.,  1826, 
and  by  C.  and  T.  Miiller,  in  Didot's  Fragm.  Hist,  Gr.,  vol.  i.,  p.  45,  seqq., 
Paris,  1841. 

XIII.  Among  the  historical  writers  that  remain,  the  most  celebrated, 
and  the  only  one  deserving  of  mention,  is  XANTHUS'  (adveos),  the  Lydian. 
Suidas  makes  him  to  have  been  a  native  of  Sardis,  but  this  point  is  a 
doubtful  one,  as  is  also  the  period  when  he  flourished.     His  date,  how 
ever,  is  commonly  fixed  by  modern  scholars  at  B.C.  499.     Xanthus, 
though  a  Lydian  by  birth,  received  a  Greek  education,  and  wrote  a  his 
tory  of  Lydia  in  that  language,  of  which  some  considerable  fragments 
have  come  down  to  us.     The  genuineness  of  the  work,  however,  which 
went  under  his  name,  was  questioned  by  some  of  the  ancient  gramma 
rians  themselves,  and  at  the  present  day,  also,  opinions  are  divided. 
Among  modern  scholars,  Creuzer,  in  his  edition  of  the  fragments  of  Xan 
thus,  has  maintained  the  genuineness  of  the  work,  while  Welcker  has 
constructed  an  elaborate  argument  against  it.2     C.  Miiller  adopts  the 
opinion  of  Welcker.     It  is  certain  that  much  of  the  matter  in  the  extant 
fragments 'is  spurious;  and  the  probability  appears  to  be  that  the  work 
from  which  they  are  taken  is  the  production  of  an  Alexandrean  gramma 
rian,  founded  upon  the  genuine  work  of  Xanthus.     C.  Miiller  has  pointed 
out  those  passages  which,  in  his  opinion,  are  most  probably  portions  of 
the  original  work.     They  are  of  great  value.     A  work  on  the  Magian  re 
ligion  (WayiKa)  was  also  ascribed  to  Xanthus,  but  was  indubitably  spuri 
ous.     The  fragments  of  Xanthus  are  collected  in  Creuzer's  Histor.  Gr&c. 
Antiquiss.  Fragmenta,  Heidelb.,  1806,  and  by  C.  and  T.  Miiller,  in  Didot's 
Fragm.  Hist.  Grac.,  vol.  i.,  p.  xx.,  seqq. ;  p.  36,  seqq.,  Paris,  1841. 

XIV.  To  the  Greek  historical  writers  before  Herodotus  modern  schol 
ars  have  given  the  common  name  of  logographers  (\oyoypd<boi),  which  is 
applied  by  Thucydides3  to  all  historians  previous  to  himself,  including 
thus  even  Herodotus  in  the  number.     The  appellation  is  a  convenient 
one,  though  perhaps  not  very  correct ;  for  the  term  had  not  so  limited  a 
meaning  as  this  among  the  ancients,  since  \6yos  signifies  any  discourse 
in  prose,  and  accordingly  the  Athenians  gave  the  name  to  persons  who 
wrote  judicial  speeches  or  pleadings,  and  sold  them  to  those  who  were 
in  want  of  them.     These  persons  were  also  called  \oyoiroioi.     Be  this, 
however,  as  it  may,  the  term  logographer,  as  applied  to  the  historical 
writers  previous  to  Herodotus,  is  meant  to  indicate  a  class  of  persons 
who  seem  to  have  aimed  more  at  amusing  their  hearers  or  readers  than 
at  imparting  accurate  historical  knowledge.     They  described  in  prose  the 
mythological  subjects  and  traditions  which  had  previously  been  treated 
of  by  the  epic,  and  especially  by  the  cyclic  poets.     The  omissions  in  the 
narratives  of  their  predecessors  were  probably  filled  up  by  traditions  de 
rived  from  other  quarters,  in  order  to  produce,  at  least  in  form,  a  con- 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  z  Seebode,  Archiv.,  1830,  p.  70,  seqq. 

3  Thurijd.,  i.,  21. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD. 

nected  history.  In  many  cases,  as  we  have  already  seen,  they  were 
mere  collections  of  local  and  genealogical  traditions.1  The  first  Greek 
to  whom  the  title  of  historian  properly  and  truly  belonged  was  Herodotus, 
the  Homer  of  history. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 
THIRD  OR  EARLY  PROSAIC  PERIOD— continued. 

HERODOTUS.2 

HERODOTUS  ('HpoSoros),  the  earliest  Greek  historian  (in  the  true  sense 
of  the  term),  was,  according  to  his  own  statement  at  the  beginning  of 
his  work,  a  native  of  Halicarnassus,  a  Doric  city  in  Caria,  which,  at  the 
time  of  his  birth,  was  governed  by  Artemisia,  a  vassal-queen  of  the  great 
king  of  Persia.  Our  information  respecting  the  life  of  Herodotus  is  ex 
tremely  scanty,  since,  besides  the  meagre  and  confused  article  of  Sui- 
das,  there  are  only  one  or  two  passages  of  ancient  writers  that  contain 
any  direct  notice  of  the  life  and  age  of  the  historian,  and  the  test  must 
be  gleaned  from  his  own  work.  He  was  born  about  B.C.  484.  His  fami 
ly  was  one  of  the  most  distinguished  in  Halicarnassus,  and  thus  became 
involved  in  the  civil  commotions  of  the  city.  Artemisia  had  been  suc 
ceeded  by  her  son  Pisindelis,  and  he,  in  his  turn,  by  his  son  Lygdamis. 
This  last-mentioned  ruler  was  hostile  to  the  family  of  Herodotus.  He 
put  to  death  Panyasis,3  who  was  probably  the  maternal  uncle  of  the  his 
torian,  and  who  will  be  mentioned  hereafter  as  one  of  the  restorers  of 
epic  poetry ;  and  he  obliged  Herodotus  himself  to  take  refuge  abroad. 
His  flight  must  have  taken  place  at  an  early  age.  Miiller  places  it  about 
B.C.  452,  but  this  is  too  late  a  period.  Herodotus  repaired  to  Samos,  the 
Ionic  island,  where  probably  some  of  his  kinsmen  resided,  since  Panya 
sis,  too,  is  called  a  Samian.  In  Samos,  he  cultivated  the  Ionic  dialect, 
and  here  too  he  imbibed  the  Ionic  spirit  which  pervades  his  history.  Be 
fore  he  was  thirty  years  of  age,  he  joined  in  an  attempt  made  from  Samos 
to  effect  the  liberation  of  his  native  city  from  the  yoke  of  Lygdamis.  The 
attempt  proved  successful ;  but  the  banishment  of  the  tyrant  did  not  give 
tranquillity  to  Halicarnassus,  and  Herodotus,  who  himself  had  become 
an  object  of  dislike,  again  left  his  native  country,  and  settled  at  Thurii, 
in  Magna  Grscia,  where,  excepting  the  intervals  of  his  travels,  he  spent 
the  remainder  of  his  life.  Whether  he  went  to  Thurii  with  the  first 
Athenian  colonists,  in  B.C.  445,  or  whether  he  followed  afterward,  is  a 
disputed  point.  The  better  opinion  appears  to  be  that  he  did  not  go  with 
the  first  settlers  to  Thurii,  but  followed  them  many  years  after,  perhaps 
about  the  time  of  the  death  of  Pericles.  The  grounds  for  this  opinion 
are  a  passage  in  his  own  work  (v.,  77),  from  which  we  must,  in  all  proba 
bility,  infer  that  in  B.C.  431,  the  year  of  the  outbreak  of  the  Peloponne- 
sian  war,  he  was  at  Athens,  for  it  appears  from  that  passage  that  he  saw 

1  Thirlwall,  Hist.  Gr.,  ii.,  p.  126,  seqq. ;  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  206,  seqq. 

2  Smith,  Diet.  Biosrr.,  s.  v. ;  Miller,  Hist.  dr.  Lit.,  p.  266,  seqq.       3  Kuld.,  s.  v 


148  GREEK     LITERATURG. 

the  Propylsea,  which  were  not  completed  till  the  year  in  which  that  war 
began  ;  and  also  the  circumstance  of  his  being  well  acquainted  with  and 
adopting  the  principles  of  policy  followed  by  Pericles  and  his  party,  which 
leads  us  to  the  belief  that  he  witnessed  the  disputes  at  Athens  between 
Pericles  and  his  opponents.1 

The  time  when  Herodotus  wrote  his  history  has  been  a  matter  of  con 
siderable  discussion ;  the  following,  however,  may  be  regarded  as  the 
fairest  view  of  the  case.  The  narrative  of  the  Persian  war,  which  forms 
the  main  substance  of  the  whole  work,  breaks  off  with  the  victorious  re 
turn  of  the  Greek  fleet  from  the  coast  of  Asia,  and  the  taking  of  Sestos 
by  the  Athenians,  in  B.C.  479.  But  numerous  events,  which  belong  to 
a  much  later  period,  are  alluded  to  or  mentioned  incidentally,  and  the 
latest  of  them  refers  to  the  year  B.C.  408,  when  Herodotus  was  at  least 
77  years  old.  Hence  it  follows  that,  with  Pliny,  we  must  believe  that 
Herodotus  wrote  his  work  in  his  old  age,  during  his  stay  at  Thurii,  where, 
according  to  Strabo,  he  also  died  and  was  buried,  for  no  one  mentions 
that  he  ever  returned  to  Greece,  or  that  he  made  two  editions  of  his 
work,  as  some  modern  critics  assume,  who  suppose  that  at  Thurii  he  re 
vised  his  work,  and  among  other  things  introduced  those  parts  which  re 
fer  to  later  events.  The  whole  work  makes  the  impression  of  a  fresh 
composition  ;'  there  is  no  trace  of  labor  or  revision  ;  it  has  all  the  appear 
ance  of  having  been  written  by  a  man  at  an  advanced  period  of  his  life. 
Its  abrupt  termination,  and  the  fact  that  the  author  does  not  tell  us  what 
in  an  earlier  part  of  his  work  he  distinctly  promises  (e.  g.,  vii.,  213),  prove 
almost  beyond  a  doubt  that  his  work  was  the  production  of  the  last  years 
of  his  life,  and  that  death  prevented  his  completing  it.  Had  he  not  writ 
ten  it  at  Thurii,  he  would  scarcely  have  been  called  a  Thurian,  or  the 
Thurian  historian,  a  name  by  which  he  is  sometimes  distinguished  by  the 
ancients.2  There  are,  lastly,  some  passages  in  the  work  itself,  which 
must  suggest  to  every  unbiased  reader  the  idea  that  the  author  wrote 
somewhere  in  the  south  of  Italy.3 

Herodotus  presents  himself  to  our  consideration  in  two  points  of  view  ; 
as  a  traveller  and  observer,  and  as  an  historian.  The  extent  of  his  trav 
els  may  be  ascertained  pretty  clearly  from  his  History,  but  the  order  in 
which  he  visited  each  place,  and  the  time  of  visiting,  can  not  be  determ 
ined.  His  travels,  however,  must  have  occupied  a  considerable  period 
of  his  life,  and  he  would  seem  to  have  first  entered  upon  them  in  the  full 
strength  of  body  and  mind,  and  after  having  been  completely  educated. 
The  story  of  his  reading  his  work  at  the  Olympic  games,  which  has  found 
its  way  into  most  modern  narratives,  has  been  ably  discussed  by  Dahl- 
mann,4  and  we  may  say  disproved.  This  story  is  founded  on  a  small 
piece  by  Lucian,  entitled  "  Herodotus  or  Action,"  which  apparently  was 
not  intended  by  the  writer  himself  as  an  historical  truth ;  and,  in  addition 
to  this,  Herodotus  was  only  about  twenty-eight  years  old  when  he  is  said 
to  have  read  to  the  assembled  Greeks  at  Olympia  a  work  which  was  the 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

2  Aristot.,  Rhet.,  iii.,  6  ;  Pint.,  T)e  ExiL.  13  ;  De  Malign.  Herod.,  35. 

,3  Smith,  rtict.,  s.  v.  *  Life  of  tfrrodotus,  p.  8,  seqq.,  Enpl.  transl 


PROSAIC     PERIOD. 


149 


result  of  most  extensive  travelling  and  research,  and  which  bears  in  every 
part  of  it  evident  marks  of  the  hand  of  a  man  of  mature  age.  Some  crit 
ics  have  recourse  to  the  supposition  that  what  he  recited  at  Olympia  was 
only  a  sketch  or  a  portion  of  his  work  ;  but  this  is  in  direct  contradiction 
to  the  statement  of  Lucian,  who  asserts  that  he  read  the  whole  of  the 
nine  books,  which,  on  that  occasion,  received  the  names  of  the  Muses. 
If  the  story  in  question  had  been  known  at  all  in  the  time  of  Plutarch, 
this  writer  surely  would  not  have  passed  it  over  in  silence,  when  he  tells 
of  Herodotus  having  calumniated  all  the  Greeks,  except  the  Athenians, 
who  had  bribed  him.  There  is  one  tradition,  indeed,  which  mentions  that 
Herodotus  read  his  work  at  the  Panathenaic  festival  at  Athens,  in  B.C. 
445  or  446,  and  that  there  existed  at  Athens  a  psephisma,  granting  to  the 
historian  a  reward  of  ten  talents  from  the  public  treasury.1  This  tradi 
tion,  however,  is  not  only  in  contradiction  with  the  time  when  he  must 
have  written  his  work,  but  is  evidently  nothing  more  than  part  and  parcel 
of  the  charge,  which  the  author  of  that  contemptible  treatise  on  the  Ma 
lignity  of  Herodotus  makes  against  the  historian,  namely,  that  he  was 
bribed  by  the  Athenians.  The  source  of  all  this  calumnious  scandal  is 
nothing  but  the  petty  vanity  of  the  Thebans,  which  was  hurt  by  the  truth 
ful  description  of  their  conduct  during  the  war  against  Persia.2 

With  a  simplicity  which  characterizes  his  whole  work,  Herodotus  makes 
no  display  of  the  great  extent  of  his  travels  ;  and  he  is  so  free  from  the 
ordinary  vanity  of  travellers,  that,  instead  of  acting  a  prominent  part  in 
his  narrative,  he  very  seldom  appears  at  all  in  it.  Hence  it  is  impossible 
for  us  to  give  any  thing  like  an  accurate  chronological  succession  of  his 
travels.  In  Greece  Proper,  and  on  the  coasts  of  Asia  Minor,  there  is 
scarcely  any  place  of  importance  with  which  he  is  not  perfectly  familiar 
from  his  own  observation,  and  where  he  did  not  make  inquiries  respecting 
this  or  that  particular  point ;  we  may  mention  more  especially  the  orac 
ular  places,  such  as  Dodona  and  Delphi.  In  many  quarters  of  Greece, 
such  as  Samos,  Athens,  Thebes,  and  Corinth,  he  seems  to  have  made  a 
rather  long  stay.  The  spots  where  the  great  battles  had  been  fought 
between  the  Greeks  and  barbarians,  as  Marathon,  Thermopylae,  Salamis, 
and  Plataeae,  were  well  known  to  him,  and  on  the  whole  route  which 
Xerxes  and  his  army  took,  on  their  march  from  the  Hellespont  to  Athens, 
there  was  probably  not  a  place  which  he  had  not  seen  with  his  own  eyes. 
He  also  visited  most  of  the  Greek  islands,  not  only  in  the  J^gean,  but 
even  those  in  the  western  waters  of  Greece,  such  as  Zacynthus.  As  for 
his  travels  in  foreign  countries,  we  know  that  he  sailed  through  the  Hel 
lespont,  the  Propontis,  and  crossed  the  Euxine  in  both  directions ;  with 
the  Palus  Maeotis  he  was  but  imperfectly  acquainted.  He  further  visited 
Thrace3  and  Scythia.4  The  interior  of  Asia  Minor,  especially  Lydia,  was 
well  known  to  him,  and  so  was  also  Phoenicia.  He  visited  Tyre  for  the 
special  purpose  of  obtaining  information  respecting  the  worship  of  Her 
cules.  Previous  to  this  he  had  been  in  Egypt,  for  it  was  in  Egypt  that 
his  curiosity  respecting  Hercules  had  been  excited.5 

1  Pint.,  De  Malign.  Herod.,  26.  2  Smith,  I.  c.  3  ii.,  103. 

*  iv.,  76,  81.  s  smith,  I.e. 


150  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

What  Herodotus  has  done  for  the  history  of  Egypt  surpasses  in  import 
ance  every  thing  that  was  written  in  ancient  times  upon  that  country,  al 
though  his  account  of  it  forms  only  an  episode  in  his  work.  There  is  no 
reason  for  supposing  that  he  made  himself  acquainted  with  the  Egyptian 
language,  which  was,  in  fact,  scarcely  necessary  on  account  of  the  nu 
merous  Greek  settlers  in  Egypt,  as  well  as  on  account  of  that  large  class 
of  persons  who  made  it  their  business  to  act  as  interpreters  between  the 
Egyptians  and  Greeks  ;  and  it  appears  that  Herodotus  was  accompanied 
by  one  of  these  interpreters.  He  travelled  to  the  south  of  Egypt,  as  far 
as  Elephantine,  every  where  forming  connections  with  the  priests,  and 
gathering  information  upon  the  early  history  of  the  country  and  its  rela 
tions  to  Greece.  He  saw  with  his  own  eyes  all  the  wonders  of  Egypt, 
and  the  accuracy  of  his  observations  and  descriptions  still  excites  the  as 
tonishment  of  travellers  in  that  country.  The  time  at  which  he  visited 
Egypt  may  be  determined  with  tolerable  accuracy.  He  was  there  shortly 
after  the  defeat  of  Inarus  by  the  Persian  general  Megabyzus,  which  hap 
pened  in  B.C.  456  ;  for  he  saw  the  battle-field  still  covered  with  the  bones 
and  skulls  of  the  slain,1  so  that  his  visit  to  Egypt  may  be  assigned  to  about 
B.C.  450.  From  Egypt  he  appears  to  have  made  excursions  to  the  east 
into  Arabia,  and  to  the  west  into  Libya,  at  least  as  far  as  Cyrene,  which 
was  well  known  to  him.  It  is  not  impossible  that  he  may  have  even  visit 
ed  Carthage.  From  Egypt  he  crossed  over  by  sea  to  Tyre,  and  visited 
Palestine  ;  that  he  saw  the  Rivers  Euphrates  and  Tigris,  and  the  city  of 
Babylon,  is  quite  certain.2  From  thence  he  seems  to  have  travelled  north 
ward,  for  he  saw  the  city  of  Ecbatana,  which  reminded  him  of  Athens. 
There  can  be  little  doubt  that  he  visited  Susa  also,  but  we  can  not  trace 
him  farther  into  the  interior  of  Asia.  His  desire  to  increase  his  knowl 
edge  by  travelling  does  not  appear  to  have  subsided  even  in  his  old  age, 
for  it  would  seem  that  during  his  residence  at  Thurii  he  visited  several 
of  the  Greek  settlements  in  Southern  Italy  and  Sicily,  though  his  knowl 
edge  of  the  west  of  Europe  was  very  limited,  for  he  strangely  calls  Sar 
dinia  the  greatest  of  all  islands.3 

A  second  source  from  which  Herodotus  drew  his  information  was  the 
literature  of  his  country,  especially  the  poetical  portion,  for  prose  had  not 
yet  been  cultivated  very  extensively,  as  we  have  just  had  occasion  to  ob 
serve.  With  the  poems  of  Homer  and  Hesiod  he  was  perfectly  familiar, 
though  he  attributed  less  historical  importance  to  them  than  might  have 
been  expected.  He  placed  them  about  400  years  before  his  own  time, 
with  the  paradoxical  assertion  that  they  had  made  the  theogony  of  the 
Greeks,  a  subject  to  which  we  have  alluded  in  a  previous  part  of  the 
present  work.  He  was  also  acquainted  with  the  poetry  of  Alcaeus,  Sap 
pho,  Simonides,  JEschylus,  and  Pindar.  He  farther  derived  assistance 
from  the  Arimaspea,  the  epic  poem  of  Aristeas,  and  from  the  works  of  the 
historical  writers  or  logographers  who  had  preceded  him,  such  as  Heca- 
taeus,  though  he  worked  with  perfect  independence  of  them,  and  occasion 
ally  corrected  mistakes  which  they  had  committed  ;  but  his  main  sources, 
after  all,  were  his  own  investigations  and  observations.4 

i  iii.,  12.        2  i,,  178,  seqq. ;  i.,  193.          3  i.,  170  ;  v.,  106 ;  vi.,  2.          *  Smith,  I.  c. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  151 

The  object  of  the  work  of  Herodotus  is  to  give  an  account  of  the  strug 
gles  between  the  Greeks  and  Persians,  from  which  the  former,  with  the 
aid  of  the  gods,  came  off  victorious.  The  subject,  therefore,  is  a  truly 
national  one,  but  the  discussion  of  it,  especially  in  the  early  part,  led  the 
author  into  various  digressions  and  episodes,  as  he  was  sometimes  obliged 
to  trace  to  distant  times  the  causes  of  the  events  he  had  to  relate,  or  to 
give  a  history  or  description  of  a  nation  or  country,  with  which,  according 
to  his  view,  the  reader  ought  to  be  made  familiar ;  and  having  once 
launched  out  into  such  a  digression,  he  usually  can  not  resist  the  tempta 
tion  of  telling  the  whole  tale,  so  that  most  of  his  episodes  form  each  an 
interesting  and  complete  whole  by  itself.  He  traces  the  enmity  between 
Europe  and  Asia  to  the  mythical  times.  But  he  rapidly  passes  over  the 
mythical  ages  to  come  to  Croesus,  king  of  Lydia,  who  was  known  to  have 
committed  acts  of  hostility  against  the  Greeks.  This  induces  him  to  give 
a  full  history  of  Croesus  and  the  kingdom  of  Lydia.  The  conquest  of 
Lydia  by  the  Persians  under  Cyrus  then  leads  him  to  relate  the  rise  of  the 
Persian  monarchy,  and  the  subjugation  of  Asia  Minor  and  Babylon.  The 
nations  which  are  mentioned  in  the  course  of  this  narrative  are  again  dis 
cussed  more  or  less  minutely.  The  history  of  Cambyses  and  his  expedi 
tion  into  Egypt  induce  him  to  enter  into  the  detail  of  Egyptian  history. 
The  expedition  of  Darius  against  the  Scythians  causes  him  to  speak  of 
Scythia  and  the  north  of  Europe.  The  kingdom  of  Persia  now  extended 
from  Scythia  to  Cyrene,  and  an  army  being  called  in  by  the  Cyreneans 
against  the  Persians,  Herodotus  proceeds  to  give  an  account  of  Cyrene 
and  Libya.  In  the  mean  time,  the  revolt  of  the  lonians  breaks  out,  which 
eventually  brings  the  contest  between  Persia  and  Greece  to  an  end.  An 
account  of  this  insurrection,  and  of  the  rise  of  Athens  after  the  expulsion 
of  the  Pisistratidae,  is  followed  by  what  properly  constitutes  the  principal 
part  of  the  work,  and  the  history  of  the  Persian  war  now  runs  on  in  a 
regular  channel  until  the  taking  of  Sestos.1 

In  this  manner  alone  was  it  possible  for  Herodotus  to  give  a  record  of 
the  vast  treasures  of  information  which  he  had  collected  in  the  course 
of  many  years.  But  these  digressions  and  episodes  do  not  impair  the 
plan  and  unity  of  the  work,  for  one  thread,  as  it  were,  runs  through  the 
whole,  and  the  episodes  are  only  like  branches  that  issue  from  one  and 
the  same  tree :  each  has  its  peculiar  charms  and  beauties,  and  yet  is 
manifestly  no  more  than  a  part  of  one  great  whole.  The  whole  structure 
of  the  history  thus  bears  a  strong  resemblance  to  a  grand  epic  poem. 
The  work,  however,  has  an  abrupt  termination,  and  is  probably  incomplete 
This  opinion  is  strengthened,  on  the  one  hand,  by  the  fact  that  in  one 
place  the  author  promises  to  give  the  particulars  of  an  occurrence  in  an 
other  part  of  liis  work,  though  the  promise  is  nowhere  fulfilled  (vii.,  213) ; 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  by  the  story  that  a  favorite  of  the  historian,  of 
the  name  of  Plesirrhous,  who  inherited  all  his  property,  also  edited  the 
work  after  the  author's  death.2  The  division  of  the  history  into  nine 
books,  each  bearing  the  name  of  a  muse,  was  probably  made  by  some 

1  Smith,  I.  c.  -  Ptol.  HephcEst.  ap.  Phot.,  Bibl.  Cod.,  190. 


152 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


grammarian,  for  there  is  no  indication  in  the  whole  work  of  the  division 
having  been  made  by  the  author  himself.1 

There  are  two  passages2  in  which  Herodotus  promises  to  write  a  his 
tory  of  Assyria,  which  was  either  to  form  a  part  of  his  great  work,  or  to 
be  an  independent  treatise  by  itself.  Whether  he  ever  carried  his  plan 
into  effect  is  a  question  of  considerable  doubt ;  the  probability  is  that  he 
never  did.  Layard  is  wrong  when  he  says,  in  the  introduction  to  his 
work  on  Nineveh,  that  Aristotle3  had  seen  this  history  of  Assyria.  Aris 
totle  merely  mentions  a  fact  in  natural  history  of  which  a  certain  author 
was  ignorant,  for  that  author,  in  his  account  of  the  taking  of  Nineveh, 
describes  an  eagle  drinking.  But  the  name  of  that  author,  in  the  best 
MSS.,  is  'RffioSos,  which  reading  is  retained  by  Bekker;  and  however  it 
may  seem  more  probable  that  Herodotus  should  have  described  the  tak 
ing  of  Nineveh  than  Hesiod,  yet,  even  if  so,  there  is  nothing  to  show  that 
Aristotle  did  not  cite  from  memory,  or  copy  from  some  other  less  accu 
rate  writer.4 

The  life  of  Homer  in  the  Ionic  dialect,  which  was  formerly  attributed 
to  Herodotus,  and  is  printed  at  the  end  of  several  editions  of  his  work,  is 
now  universally  acknowledged  to  be  a  production  of  a  later  date,  though 
it  was  undoubtedly  written  at  a  comparatively  early  period,  and  contains 
some  valuable  information. 

It  now  remains  to  add  a  few  remarks5  on  the  character  of  the  work 
of  Herodotus,  its  importance  as  an  historical  authority,  and  its  style  and 
language.  The  whole  work  is  pervaded  by  a  profoundly  religious  idea, 
which  distinguishes  Herodotus  from  all  other  Greek  historians.  This 
idea  is  the  strong  belief  in  a  divine  power  existing  apart  and  independent 
of  man  and  nature,  which  assigns  to  every  being  its  sphere.  This  sphere 
no  one  is  allowed  to  transgress  without  disturbing  the  order  which  has 
existed  from  the  beginning  in  the  moral  world,  no  less  than  in  the  phys 
ical  ;  and  by  disturbing  this  order,man  brings  about  his  own  destruction. 
This  divine  power  is,  in  the  opinion  of  Herodotus,  the  cause  of  all  ex 
ternal  events,  although  he  does  not  deny  the  free  activity  of  man,  or  es 
tablish  a  blind  law  of  fate  or  necessity.  The  divine  power  with  him  is 
rather  the  manifestation  of  eternal  justice,  which  keeps  all  things  in  a 
proper  equilibrium,  assigns  to  each  being  its  path,  and  keeps  it  within  its 
bounds.  Where  it  punishes  overweening  haughtiness  and  insolence,  it 
assumes  the  character  of  the  divine  Nemesis,  and  nowhere  in  history  had 
Nemesis  overtaken  and  chastised  the  offender  more  obviously  than  in  the 
contest  between  Greece  and  Asia.  When  Herodotus  speaks  of  the  envy 
of  the  gods  ($e6vos  ruv  d-ecD*/),  as  he  often  does,  we  must  understand  this 
divine  Nemesis,  who  appears  sooner  or  later  to  pursue  or  destroy  him 
who,  in  frivolous  insolence  and  conceit,  raises  himself  above  his  proper 
sphere.  Herodotus  every  where  shows  the  most  profound  reverence  for 
every  thing  which  he  conceives  as  divine,  and  rarely  ventures  to  express 
an  opinion  on  what  he  considers  a  sacred  or  religious  mystery,  though 
now  and  then  he  can  not  refrain  from  expressing  a  doubt  in  regard  to  the 

1  Smith,  I.  c.  2  i.,  10(i,  184.  3  Aristot.,  De  An.,  viii.,  18. 

4  London  Quarterly  Review,  vol.  Ixxxiv.,  p.  138,  note.         5  Smith,  I.  c. 


PROSAIC     PERIOD.  153 

correctness  of  the  popular  belief  of  his  countrymen,  commonly  owing  to 
the  influence  which  the  Egyptian  priests  exercised  on  his  mind,  but  in 
general  his  good  sense  and  sagacity  were  too  strong  to  allow  him  to  be 
misled  by  vulgar  notions  and  errors.1 

It  would  be  vain  to  deny  that  Herodotus  was,  to  a  certain  extent,  credu 
lous,  and  related  things  without  putting  to  himself  the  question  as  to 
whether  they  were  possible  at  all  or  not ;  his  political  knowledge,  and  his 
acquaintance  with  the  laws  of  nature,  were  equally  deficient ;  and,  owing 
to  these  deficiencies,  he  frequently  does  not  rise  above  the  rank  of  a  mere 
story-teller,  a  title  which  Aristotle  bestows  upon  him.2  But,  notwith 
standing  all  this,  it  is  evident  that  he  had  formed  a  high  notion  of  the 
dignity  of  history ;  and,  in  order  to  realize  his  idea,  he  exerted  all  his 
powers,  and  cheerfully  went  through  more  difficult  and  laborious  prepara 
tions  than  any  other  historian  either  before  or  after  him.  In  order  to 
form  a  fair  judgment  of  the  historical  value  of  the  work  of  Herodotus,  we 
must  distinguish  those  parts  in  which  he  speaks  from  his  own  observa 
tion,  or  gives  the  results  of  his  own  investigations,  from  those  in  which 
he  merely  repeats  what  he  was  told  by  priests,  interpreters,  guides,  and 
the  like.  In  the  latter  case  he  undoubtedly  was  often  deceived  ;  but  he 
never  intrudes  such  reports  as  any  thing  more  than  they  really  are  ;  and, 
under  the  influence  of  his  natural  good  sense,  he  very  frequently  cautions 
his  reader  by  some  such  remark  as  "  I  know  this  only  from  hearsay,"  or 
"  I  have  been  told  so,  but  do  not  believe  it."  The  same  caution  should 
guide  us  in  his  account  of  the  early  history  of  the  Greeks,  on  which  he 
touches  only  in  episodes,  for  he  is  generally  satisfied  with  some  one  tra 
dition,  without  entering  into  any  critical  examination  or  comparison  with 
other  traditions,  which  he  silently  rejects.  But,  wherever  he  speaks  from 
his  own  observation,  Herodotus  is  a  real  model  of  truthfulness  and  accu 
racy  ;  and  the  more  those  countries  of  which  he  treats  have  been  ex 
plored  by  modern  travellers,  the  more  firmly  has  his  authority  been  estab 
lished.3 

The  dialect  in  which  Herodotus  wrote  is  the  Ionic,  intermixed  with 
epic  or  poetical  expressions,  and  sometimes  even  with  Attic  and  Doric 
forms.  This  peculiarity  of  his  language  called  forth  a  number  of  lexi 
cographical  works  of  learned  grammarians,  all  of  which  are  lost,  with  the 
exception  of  a  few  remnants  in  the  Homeric  glosses  (Ae|eis).  The  excel 
lencies  of  his  style  do  not  consist  in  any  artistic  or  melodious  structure 
of  his  sentences,  but  in  the  antique  and  epic  coloring,  the  transparent 
clearness,  the  lively  flow  of  his  narrative,  the  natural  and  unaffected 
gracefulness,  and  the  occasional  signs  of  carelessness.  There  is,  perhaps, 
no  work  in  the  whole  range  of  ancient  literature  which  so  closely  resem 
bles  a  familiar  and  homely  oral  narration  as  that  of  Herodotus.  Its 
reader  can  not  help  feeling  as  though  he  was  listening  to  an  old  man, 
who,  from  the  inexhaustible  stores  of  his  knowledge  and  experience,  tells 
his  stories  with  that  single-hearted  simplicity  and  naivete  which  are  the 
marks  and  indications  of  a  truthful  spirit.4 

1  Smith,  I.  c.  2  Aristot.,  De  Animal.  Gener.,  iii.,  5.  3  Smith,  I  c7~ 

4  Smith,  I.  c.     Compare  Dahlmann,  Life  of  Herodotus,  p.  127,  seqq.,  Eng.  transl. 


154  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Notwithstanding,  however,  all  the  merits  and  excellencies  of  Herodo 
tus,  there  were,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  certain  writers  of  antiquity 
who  attacked  the  historian  on  very  serious  points,  both  in  regard  to  the 
form  and  the  substance  of  his  work.  Besides  Ctesias,  ^Elius  Harpocra- 
tion,  Manetho,  and  one  Pollio,  are  mentioned  as  authors  of  works  against 
Herodotus ;  but  all  of  them  have  perished,  with  the  exception  of  one  bear 
ing  the  name  of  Plutarch,  and  entitled  Tltpl  TTJS  'Hpo56rov  Ka/corjfleias, 
"  On  the  Malignity  of  Herodotus,"  which  is  full  of  the  most  futile  accusa 
tions  of  every  kind.  It  is  written  in  a  mean  and  malignant  spirit,  and  is 
probably  the  work  of  some  young  rhetorician  or  sophist,  who  composed  it 
as  an  exercise  in  polemics  or  controversy.1 

EDITIONS    OF    HERODOTUS. 

Herodotus  was  first  published  in  a  Latin  translation  by  Laurentius  Valla,  Venice, 
1474  ;  and  the  first  edition  of  the  Greek  original  is  that  of  Aldus  Manutius,  Venice,  1502, 
fol.,  which  was  followed  by  two  Basle  editions,  in  1541  and  1557,  fol.  The  text  is  great 
ly  corrected  in  the  edition  of  II.  Stephens,  Paris,  1570  and  1592,  fol.,  which  was  followed 
by  that  of  Jungermann,  Frankfort,  1608,  fol.,  reprinted  at  Geneva  in  1618,  and  at  London 
in  1679,  fol.  The  edition  of  James  Gronovius,  Leyden,  1715,  fol.,  has  a  peculiar  value, 
from  his  having  made  use  of  the  excellent  Medicean  MS. ;  but  it  was  greatly  surpassed 
by  the  edition  of  P.  Wesseling  and  L.  C.  Valckenaer,  Amsterdam,  1763,  fol.  Both  the 
language  and  the  matter  are  there  treated  with  great  care ;  and  the  learned  apparatus 
of  this  edition,  with  the  exception  of  the  notes  of  Gronovius,  was  afterward  incorporated 
in  the  edition  of  Schweighaeuser,  Strasburg  and  Paris,  1806, 6  vols.  in  12  parts  (reprinted 
in  London,  1824,  in  6  vols.,  and  again  in  1830,  in  5  vols.  8vo),  with  a  valuable  Lexicon 
Herodoteum.  The  editor  had  compared  several  new  MSS.,  and  was  thus  enabled  to  give 
a  text  greatly  superior  to  that  of  his  predecessors.  The  best  edition  after  this  is  that 
of  Gaisford,  Oxford,  1824,  4  vols.  8vo,  who  incorporated  in  it  nearly  all  the  notes  of  Wes 
seling,  Valckenaer,  and  Schweighaeuser,  and  also  made  a  collation  of  some  English  MSS. 
A  reprint  of  this  edition  appeared  at  Leipzig  in  1824, 4  vols.  8vo.  The  last  great  edition, 
in  which  the  subject-matter  also  is  considered  with  reference  to  modern  discoveries,  is 
that  of  Bahr,  Leipzig,  1830,  &c.,  4  vols.  8vo.  An  edition  with  valuable  English  notes 
has  been  commenced  in  the  Bibliotheca  Classica,  under  the  superintendence  of  Professor 
Long,  London,  8vo.  A  revised  text,  with  Latin  translation,  and  a  valuable  dissertation 
on  the  Ionic  dialect  by  W.  Dindorf,  forms  one  of  the  volumes  of  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grae- 
ca,  Paris,  1844,  royal  8vo.  Among  the  school  editions,  which  are  numerous,  we  may 
especially  mention  those  of  Matthise,  Leipzig,  1825,2  vols.  8vo  ;  Steger,  Gissse,  1827-29, 
3  vols.  8vo  ;  Long,  London,  1830,  8vo  ;  Bekker,  Berlin,  1833  and  1837,  8vo  ;  Stocker,  Lon 
don,  1843,  2  vols.  12mo,  2d  ed.,  containing  merely  a  continuous  history  of  the  Persian 
wars ;  and  that  of  Lhardy,  in  the  collection  of  Haupt  and  Sauppe,  Leipzig,  1850,  &c., 
12mo. 

To  these  may  be  added  the  translation  of  Larcher's  Notes  by  Cooley,  London,  1844,  2 
vols.  8vo,  and  a  selected  commentary  on  the  whole  of  Herodotus  by  Dawson  Turner, 
Oxford,  1848,  8vo. 

1  Smith,  I.  c.  On  the  whole  subject  of  the  Life  and  Writings  of  Herodotus,  consult  the 
excellent  work  of  Dahlmann  just  cited. 


ATTIC      PERIOD.  155 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD. 
INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS.1 

I.  GREEK  literature,  so  far  as  we  have  hitherto  followed  its  progress, 
was  a  common  property  of  the  different  races  of  the  nation ;  each  race 
cultivating  that  species  of  composition  which  was  best  suited  to  its  dispo 
sitions  and  capacities,  and  impressing  on  it  a  corresponding  character. 
In  this  manner  the  city  of  Miletus  in  Ionia,  the  ^Eolians  in  the  island  of 
Lesbos,  the  colonies  in  Magna  Graecia  and  Sicily,  as  well  as  the  Greeks 
of  the  mother  country,  created  new  forms  of  poetry  and  eloquence.    The 
various  sorts  of  excellence  thus  produced  did  not,  after  the  age  of  the 
Homeric  poetry,  remain  the  exclusive  property  of  the  race  among  which 
they  originated.     A  national  literature  was  early  formed  ;  every  literary 
work  in  the  Greek  language,  in  whatever  dialect  it  might  be  composed, 
was  enjoyed  by  the  whole  Greek  nation. 

II.  But  the  literature  of  Greece  necessarily  assumed  a  different  form, 
when  Athens,  raised  as  well  by  her  political  power  and  other  external 
circumstances  as  by  the  mental  qualities  of  her  citizens,  acquired  the 
rank  of  a  Capital  of  Greece  with  respect  to  literature  and  art.     Not  only 
was  her  copious  native  literature  received  with  admiration  by  all  the 
Greeks,  but  her  judgment  and  taste  were  predominant  in  all  things  relat 
ing  to  language  and  the  arts,  and  decided  what  should  be  generally  recog 
nized  as  the  classical  literature  of  Greece,  long  before  the  Alexandrine 
critics  had  prepared  their  canons.     There  is,  in  fact,  no  more  important 
epoch  in  the  history  of  the  Greek  intellect  than  the  time  when  Athens 
obtained  this  pre-eminence  over  her  sister  states. 

III.  The  character  of  the  Athenians  peculiarly  fitted  them  to  take  this 
lead.     Energy  in  action  and  cleverness  in  the  use  of  language  were  the 
qualities  which  most  distinguished  the  Athenians  in  comparison  with  the 
other  Greeks,  and  which  are  most  clearly  seen  in  their  political  conduct 
and  their  literature.     The  consciousness  of  dexterity  in  the  use  of  words, 
which  the  Athenians  cultivated  more  than  the  other  Greeks,  induced  them 
to  subject  every  thing  to  discussion.     Hence,  too,  arose  a  copiousness  of 
speech,  very  striking  as  compared  with  the  brevity  of  the  early  Greeks ; 
a  copiousness  which  subsequently  displayed  itself  in  so  marked  a  degree 
both  in  the  field  of  literature  and  the  arena  of  eloquence,  though  chas 
tened  at  the  same  time,  and  stripped  of  all  false  and  meretricious  orna 
ment  by  the  severity  of  Attic  taste. 

IV.  Before  the  Persian  war,  however,2  Athens  had  contributed  less 
than  many  other  cities,  her  inferiors  in  magnitude  and  in  political  import 
ance,  to  the  intellectual  progress  of  Greece.     She  had  produced  no  artists 

1  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  275,  seqq. 

<J  Thirlwall,  Hist.  r?r.,  vol.  iii  ,  p.  28,  ed.  1846,  8vo. 


156 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


to  be  compared  with  those  of  Argos,  Corinth,  Sicyon,  JEgina,  Laconia, 
and  of  many  cities  both  in  the  eastern  and  western  colonies.  She  could 
boast  of  no  poets  so  celebrated  as  those  of  the  Ionian  and  ^Eolian  schools. 
But  her  peaceful  glories  quickly  followed,  and  outshone  her  victories, 
conquests,  and  political  ascendency.  In  the  period  between  the  Persian 
and  the  Peloponnesian  wars,  both  literature  and  the  fine  arts  began  to 
tend  toward  Athens,  as  their  most  favored  seat.  For  here,  above  all  other 
parts  of  Greece,  genius  and  talents  were  encouraged  by  an  ample  field 
of  exertion,  by  public  sympathy  and  applause,  as  well  as  by  the  prospect 
of  other  rewards,  which,  however,  were  much  more  sparingly  bestowed. 
Accordingly,  it  was  at  Athens  that  architecture  and  sculpture  reached  the 
highest  degree  of  perfection  which  either  ever  attained  in  the  ancient 
world,  and  that  Greek  poetry  was  enriched  with  a  new  kind  of  composi 
tion,  the  drama,  which  united  the  leading  features  of  every  species  before 
cultivated  in  a  new  whole,  and  exhibited  all  the  grace  and  vigor  of  the 
Greek  imagination,  together  with  the  full  compass  and  the  highest  refine 
ment  of  the  form  of  the  language  peculiar  to  Attica.1 

V.  The  Drama,  indeed,  was  the  branch  of  literature  which  peculiarly 
signalized  the  age  of  Pericles.    The  steps  by  which  it  was  brought  through 
a  series  of  innovations  to  the  form  which  it  presents  in  its  earliest  extant 
remains  are  still  a  subject  of  controversy  among  antiquarians  ;  and  even 
the  poetical  character  of  the  authors  by  whom  these  changes  were  effect 
ed,  and  also  of  their  works,  is  involved  in  great  uncertainty.     We  have 
reason  to  believe  that  it  was  no  want  of  merit  or  of  absolute  worth 
which  caused  them  to  be  neglected  and  forgotten,  but  only  the  superior 
attraction  of  the  form  which  the  drama  finally  assumed.2 

VI.  We  now  proceed  to  the  history  of  the  Drama,  its  origin  and  prog 
ress,  and  will  endeavor  to  show  how  the  utmost  beauty  and  elegance 
were  gradually  developed  out  of  rude,  stiff,  antique  forms  : 

I.     ORIGIN     OF     TRAGEDY.3 

VII.  The  Tragedy  (rpayySla)  of  the  ancient  Greeks,  as  well  as  their 
Comedy  (icwppSfa),  confessedly  originated  in  the  worship  of  Dionysus  or 
Bacchus.     This  worship  was  of  a  two-fold  character,  corresponding  to  the 
different  conceptions  which  were  anciently  entertained  of  Dionysus,  as 
the  changeable  god  of  flourishing,  decaying,  or  renovated  nature,  and  the 
various  fortunes  to  which  in  that  character  he  was  considered  to  be  sub 
ject  at  the  different  seasons  of  the  year. 

VIII.  Hence  the  festivals  of  Dionysus  at  Athens  and  elsewhere  were 
all  solemnized  in  the  months  nearest  to  the  shortest  day,  coincident]}' 
with  the  changes  going  on  in  the  course  of  nature,  and  by  which  his  wor 
shippers  conceived  the  god  himself  to  be  affected.     His  mournful  or  joy 
ous  fortunes,  his  mystical  death,  symbolizing  the  death  of  all  vegetation 
in  the  winter,  and  his  birth*  indicating  the  renovation  of  all  nature  in  the 
spring,  and  his  struggles  in  passing  from  one  state  to  another,  were  not 
only  represented  and  sympathized  in  by  the   dithyrambic  singers  and 

1   TJiirlwall,  I.  c.  2  /^. 

3  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  288 ;  Smith,  Diet.  Ant.,  x.  r.       *  Plat.,  De  Leg,,  iii.,  p.  700. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  157 

dancers,  but  they  also  carried  their  enthusiasm  so  far  as  to  fancy  them 
selves  under  the  influence  of  the  same  events  as  the  god  himself,  and,  in 
their  attempts  to  identify  themselves  with  him  and  his  fortunes,  assumed 
the  character  of  the  subordinate  divinities,  the  Satyrs,  Nymphs,  and  Pan 
es,  who  formed  the  mythological  train  of  the  god. 

IX.  Hence  arose  the  custom  of  the  disguise  of  satyrs  being  taken  by 
the  worshippers  at  the  festivals  of  Dionysus  ;  from  the  choral  songs  and 
dances  of  whom  the  Grecian  tragedy  originated,  being  from  its  commence 
ment  connected  with  the  public  rejoicings  and  ceremonies  of  Dionysus  in 
cities,  while  comedy  was  more  a  sport  and  merriment  of  the  country  fes 
tivals.     In  fact,  the  very  name  of  Tragedy  (rpay^Sia),  far  from  signifying 
any  thing  mournful  or  pathetic,  is  most  probably  derived  from  the  goat- 
like  appearance  of  the  satyrs,  who  sang  or  acted  with  mimetic  gesticula 
tions  (opxnvis)  the  old  Bacchic  songs,  with  Silenus,  the  constant  compan 
ion  of  Dionysus,  for  their  leader.1     From  their  resemblance  in  dress  and 
action  to  goats,  they  were  sometimes  called  Tpdyoi,  and  their  song  rpay- 
cfSia,  "  the  goat-song."     According  to  another  opinion,  the  word  Tpay- 
(aSia  was  first  coined  from  the  goat  that  was  the  prize  for  the  best  ode  or 
song  in  honor  of  Dionysus.2     This  derivation,  however,  as  well  as  an 
other,  connecting  it  with  the  goat  offered  on  the  altar  of  the  god,  around 
which  the  chorus  sang,  is  not  equally  supported  by  either  the  etymolog 
ical  principles  of  the  language  or  the  analogous  instance  of  /ew^Sia,  "the 
revel-song."3 

X.  But  the  Dionysian  dithyrambs  were  not  always  of  a  gay  and  joyous 
character:  they  were  capable  of  expressing  the  extremes  of  sadness  and 
wild  lamentation,  as  well  as  the  enthusiasm  of  joy ;  and  it  was  from  the 
dithyrambic  songs  of  a  mournful  cast,  probably  sung  originally  in  the  win 
ter  months,  that  the  stately  and  solemn  tragedy  of  the  Greeks  arose.     It 
must  be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that  in  the  most  ancient  times  the  di 
thyrambic  song  was  not  executed  by  a  regular  chorus.     A  crowd  of  wor 
shippers,  under  the  influence  of  wine,  danced  up  to  and  around  a  blazing 
altar,  led  probably  by  a  flute-player,  the  subject  of  the  song  being,  as  al 
ready  remarked,  the  birth  and  adventures  of  Dionysus.4    It  is  a  reason 
able  conjecture  that  the  coryphaeus,  or  leader  of  this  irregular  chorus, 
occasionally  assumed  the  character  of  the  god  himself,  while  the  rest  of  the 
train  or  comus  represented  his  noisy  band  of  thyrsus-bearing  followers.5 

XI.  The  first  improvement  in  the  mode  of  performing  the  dithyramb 
was  introduced  by  ARION,  a  celebrated  citharcedus  of  Methymna  in  Les 
bos,  who  flourished  in  the  days  of  Stesichorus  and  Periander,  and  to  whom 
we  have  already  alluded.     He  is  generally  admitted  to  have  been  the  in 
ventor  of  the  Cyclic  chorus  (/ctf/cAios  xop&s},  in  which  the  dithyramb  was 
danced,  after  a  more  regular  fashion,  around  the  blazing  altar  by  a  band 
of  fifty  men  or  boys,  to  a  lyric  accompaniment.     The  idea  seems  to  have 
been  borrowed  by  him  from  the  Dorian  choral  odes,  with  their  regular 
lyric  movements,  since  Arion  travelled  extensively  in  the  Dorian  states 

1  Bode,  Gesch.  d.  Hell.  Dichtk.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  31.  2  Bentlcy,  Phalar.,  p.  249. 

3  Etym.  Mag.,  p.  764  ;  Eurip.,  Bacch.,  131  ;  JZlian,  V.  H.,  iii.,  40. 

*  Plat.,  Leg.,  iii.,  p.  700,  B.  "  Donaldson,  Theatre  of  the  Greeks,  p.  25,  6th  ed. 


158  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

of  Hellas,  and  had  ample  opportunities  of  observing  the  varieties  of  choral 
worship,  and  of  introducing  any  improvement  which  he  might  wish  to 
make  in  it.1 

XII.  Previous  to  the  time  of  Arion,  the  leaders  of  the  wild,  irregular 
comus,  which  danced  the  dithyramb,  bewailed  the  sorrows  of  Bacchus,  or 
commemorated  his  wonderful  birth  in  spontaneous  effusions,  accompa 
nied  by  suitable  action,  for  which  they  trusted  to  the  inspiration  of  the 
wine-cup.     This  is  the  meaning  of  Aristotle's  assertion,  that  this  primi 
tive  Tragedy  was  "  extemporaneous"  (auTo<rxeSiao"riK^).2     Arion,  how 
ever,  by  composing  regular  poems  to  be  sung  to  the  lyre,  at  once  raised 
the  dithyramb  to  a  literary  position,  and  laid  the  foundations  of  the  stately 
superstructure  which  was  afterward  erected.     He  turned  the  comus  also, 
or  moving  crowd  of  worshippers,  into  a  standing  chorus,  of  the  same  kind 
as  that  which  gave  Stesichorus  his  surname.     He  was  the  inventor,  also, 
of  the  tragic  style  (rpayiKov  rp6irov  efye-nfc),  that  is,  he  introduced  a  style 
of  music  or  harmony  adapted  to  and  intended  for  a  chorus  of  Satyrs. 

XIII.  Next  in  order  was  Thespis,  the  celebrated  contemporary  of  Pis- 
istratus,  to  whom  the  invention  of  Greek  tragedy  has  been  generally  as 
cribed.     He  was  born  at  Icarius,3  an  Attic  deme,4  at  the  beginning  of 
the  sixth  century  B.C.5    His  birth-place  derived  its  name,  according  to 
tradition,  from  the  father  of  Erigone  ;6  it  had  always  been  a  seat  of  the 
religion  of  Bacchus,  and  the  origin  of  Athenian  tragedy  and  comedy  has 
been  confidently  referred  to  the  drunken  festivals  of  the  place  ;  indeed,  it 
is  not  improbable  that  the  name  itself  may  point  to  the  old  mimetic  ex 
hibitions  which  were  common  there.7 

XIV.  Thespis  is  said  to  have  introduced  an  actor  for  the  sake  of  afford 
ing  an  interval  of  rest  to  the  Dionysian  chorus.8    The  actor  was  called 
inroKpLT-hs,  from  viroKpiveffeai,  "to  answer,"  because  he  answered,  as  it  were, 
the  songs  of  the  chorus.     This  actor  was  generally,  perhaps  always,  the 
poet  himself.     He  invented  a  disguise  for  the  face  by  means  of  a  pig 
ment,  prepared  from  the  herb  purslain ;  and  afterward  constructed  a  linen 
mask,  in  order,  probably,  that  he  might  be  able  to  sustain  more  than  one 
character.9    He  is  also  said  to  have  introduced  some  important  alterations 
into  the  dances  of  the  chorus,  and  his  figures  were  known  in  the  days  of 
Aristophanes.10    He  did  not,  however,  as  an  actor,  confine  his  speech  to 
mere  narration ;  he  addressed  it  to  the  chorus,  which  carried  on  with  him, 
by  means  of  its  leaders,  a  sort  of  dialogue.     The  chorus,  when  not  dan 
cing,  stood  upon  the  steps  of  the  thymele  (3-v^eATj),  or  altar  of  Bacchus ; 
and  in  order  that  he  might  address  them  from  an  equal  elevation,  he  was 
placed  upon  a  table  (e'AeJs),11  which  was  thus  the  predecessor  of  the  stage, 
between  which  and  the  thymele,  in  later  times,  there  was  always  an  in 
tervening  space.    The  wagon  of  Thespis,  of  which  Horace  writes,  must 

i  Donaldson,  p.  29.  2  Anstot.,  Poet.,  c.  4. 

3  Suid.,  s.  v.  4  Leake,  Demi  of  Attica,  p.  194. 

5  Bentley,  however,  fixes  the  time  of  Thespis's  first  exhibition  at  536  B.C. 

6  Steph.  Byz.,  s.  v.  'Ixapt'a ;  Hygin.,  Fab.,  130.        7  Athen.,  ii.,  p.  40 ;  Donaldson,  p.  47. 
»  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  66.       °  Welcker,  Nachtrag,  p.  271  ;  Thirlwall,  Hist.  Gr.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  126. 
10  Vesp.,  1479.  n  Welcker,  Nachlrag,p.  248. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  159 

have  arisen  from  some  confusion  between  this  standing-place  for  the  actor 
and  the  wagon  of  Susarion.1 

XV.  The  custom  introduced  by  Thespis  was  continued  by  Phrynichus. 
But  as  it  was  clear  that,  if  the  chorus  took  an  active  and  independent  part 
in  such  a  play,  it  would  have  been  obliged  to  leave  its  original  and  char 
acteristic  sphere,  ^schylus,  in  consequence,  added  a  second  actor,  so 
that  the  action  and  the  dialogue  became  now  independent  of  the  chorus, 
and  the  dramatist,  at  the  same  time,  had  an  opportunity  of  showing  two 
persons  in  contrast  with  each  other  on  the  stage.     A  third  actor  was 
added  by  Sophocles ;  and  it  is  said  that  Cratinus  was  the  first  to  make 
this  addition  in  comedy.     A  fourth  actor,  except,  perhaps,  in  the  CEdipus 
Coloneus,*  was  never  added ;  but  if  a  fourth  character  had  to  be  introduced, 
one  of  the  three  present  on  the  stage  retired,  and  came  in  again  person 
ating  this  fourth  one.    Any  number  of  mutes,  however,  might  appear  upon 
the  stage. 

XVI.  The  three  regular  actors  were  distinguished  by  the  technical 
names  of  TrpuTaycavia'TTis,  SevrfpayuviffT^s,  and  rpLTaycovKTT^s,  which  indi 
cated  the  more  or  less  prominent  part  which  an  actor  had  to  perform  in 
the  drama.    Certain  conventional  means  were  also  devised,  by  which  the 
spectators,  at  the  moment  an  actor  appeared  on  the  stage,  were  enabled 
to  judge  which  part  he  was  going  to  perform.     Thus  the  protagonistes  al 
ways  came  on  the  stage  from  a  door  in  the  centre,  the  deuteragonistes  from 
one  on  the  right,  and  the  tritagonistes  from  a  door  on  the  left  hand  side. 
The  protagonistes  was  the  principal  hero  or  heroine  of  a  play,  in  whom  all 
the  power  and  energy  of  the  drama  were  concentrated  ;  and  whenever  a 
Greek  play  is  called  after  the  name  of  one  of  its  characters,  it  is  always 
the  name  of  the  character  sustained  by  the  protagonistes.     The  female 
characters  of  a  play  were  always  performed  by  young  men. 

II.     ORIGIN     OF     THE     SATYRIC     DRAMA.3 

XVII.  The  first  writer  of  satyric  dramas  was  PRATINAS,  of  Phlius,  a 
town  not  far  from  Sicyon.     For  some  time  previous  to  this  poet,  and 
probably  as  early  as  Thespis,  tragedy  had  been  gradually  departing  more 
and  more  from  its  old  characteristics,  and  inclining  to  heroic  fables,  to 
which  the  chorus  of  satyrs  was  not  a  fit  accompaniment.     But  the  fun 
and  merriment  caused  by  them  were  too  good  to  be  lost,  or  displaced  by 
the  severe  dignity  of  the  JEschylean  drama.     Accordingly,  the  satyric 
drama,  distinct  from  the  recent  and  dramatic  tragedy,  but  suggested  by 
the  sportive  element  of  the  old  dithyramb,  was  founded  by  Pratinas,  who, 
however,  appears  to  have  been  surpassed  in  his  own  invention  by  Chcerilus. 

XVIII.  It  was  always  written  by  tragedians,  and  generally  three  trage 
dies  and  one  satyric  piece  were  represented  together,  which,  in  some  in 
stances  at  least,  formed  a  connected  whole,  called  a  tetralogy  (rerpaXoyia). 
The  satyric  piece  was  acted  last,  so  that  the  minds  of  the  spectators  were 
agreeably  relieved  by  a  merry  after-piece,  at  the  close  of  an  earnest  and 

1  Welcker,  Nachtrag,  p.  247  ;  Gnippe,  Ariadne,  p.  122  ;  Donaldson,  p.  48. 

2  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  305.     Consult,  on  the  opposite  side,  Donaldson,  p.  164. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Ant.,  s.  v.  Tragcedia, 


160  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

engrossing  tragedy.  The  distinguishing  feature  of  this  drama  was  the 
chorus  of  satyrs,  in  appropriate  dresses  and  masks,  and  its  subjects  seem 
to  have  been  taken  from  the  same  class  of  the  adventures  of  Bacchus  and 
of  the  heroes  as  those  of  tragedy  ;  but,  of  course,  they  were  so  treated 
and  selected,  that  the  presence  of  rustic  satyrs  would  seem  appropriate. 
In  their  jokes,  and  drollery,  and  naivete,  consisted  the  merriment  of  the 
piece  ;  for  the  kings  and  heroes  who  were  introduced  into  their  company 
were  not  of  necessity  thereby  divested  of  their  epic  and  legendary  char 
acter,  though  they  were  obliged  to  conform  to  their  situation,  and  suffer 
some  diminution  of  dignity  from  their  position.  Hence  the  satyric  drama 
is  not  unaptly  called  "  a  playful  tragedy"  (irai£ov<ra  TpayySia),  being  both 
in  form  and  materials  the  same  as  tragedy.1 

XIX.  It  must,  however,  be  observed,  that  there  were  some  characters 
and  legends  which,  as  not  presenting  any  serious  or  pathetic  aspects, 
were  not  adapted  for  tragedy,  and  therefore  were  naturally  appropriated 
to  the  Satyric  drama.     Such  were  Sisyphus,  Autolycus,  Circe,  Callisto, 
Midas,  Omphale,  and  the  robber  Sciron.    Hercules,  also,  as  he  appears  in 
Aristophanes  (Ranee)  and  in  the  Alcestis  of  Euripides,  was  a  favorite  sub 
ject  of  this  drama,  as  being  no  unfit  companion  for  a  drunken  Silenus  and 
his  crew.2     The  only  extant  satyric  drama  is  the  Cyclops  of  Euripides, 
though  we  possess  numerous  fragments  of  others.    A  list  of  satyric  pieces 
is  given  by  Welcker.3 

III.  REPRESENTATION  OF  GREEK  PLAYS.4 

XX.  If  the  Greek  plays  themselves  differed  essentially  from  those  of 
our  own  times,  they  were  even  more  dissimilar  in  respect  to  the  mode 
and  circumstances  of  their  representation.     We  have  theatrical  exhibi 
tions  of  some  kind  every  evening  throughout  the  greater  part  of  the  year, 
and  in  capital  cities  many  are  going  on  at  the  same  time  in  different  the 
atres.     In  Greece,  however,  the  dramatic  performances  were  carried  on 
for  a  few  days  only  in  the  spring ;  the  theatre  was  large  enough  to  con 
tain  the  whole  population,  and  every  citizen  was  there,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  from  daybreak  to  sunset.5    With  us,  a  successful  play  is  repeated 
night  after  night,  for  months  together ;  in  Greece  the  most  admired  dra 
mas  were  seldom  repeated,  and  never  in  the  same  year.  The  theatre  with 
us  is  merely  a  place  of  public  entertainment ;  in  Greece  it  was  the  temple 
of  the  god,  whose  altar  was  the  central  point  of  the  semicircle  of  seats  or 
steps  from  which  some  30,0006  of  his  worshippers  gazed  upon  a  spectacle 
instituted  in  his  honor.     Our  theatrical  costumes  are  intended  to  convey 
an  idea  of  the  dresses  actually  worn  by  the  persons  represented,  while 
those  of  the  Greeks  were  nothing  but  modifications  of  the  festal  robes 
worn  in  the  Dionysian  processions.7     Finally,  the  modern  playwright  has 
only  the  approbation  or  disapprobation  of  his  audience  to  look  to,  whereas 
no  Greek  play  was  represented  until  it  had  been  approved  by  a  board  ap 
pointed  to  decide  between  the  rival  dramatists. 

i  Welcker,  Nachtrag,  p.  331 .       2  Mutter,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  295.       3  Nachtrag,  p.  284,  seqq. 
4  Donaldson,  Theatre  of  the  Greeks,  p.  141,  seqqt  5  JEschin.  c.  Ctes.,  p.  488,  Bekker. 

6  Plat.,  Sympos.,  p.  175,  E,  7  Miiller,  Eumeniden,  6  32  ;  Id.,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  296. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  161 

XXI.  Theatrical  exhibitions  formed  a  part  of  certain  festivals  of  Bac 
chus.     In  order,  then,  to  ascertain  at  what  time  of  the  year  they  took 
place,  we  must  inquire  how  many  festivals  were  held  in  Attica  in  honor 
of  that  god,  and  then  determine  at  which  of  them  theatrical  representa 
tions  were  given.     There  have  been  great  diversities  of  opinion  in  regard 
to  the  number  of  the  Attic  Dionysia,  or  festivals  of  Bacchus.     It  appears, 
however,  to  be  now  pretty  generally  agreed  among  scholars  that  there 
were  four  Bacchic  feasts,  in  the  sixth,  seventh,  eighth,  and  ninth  months 
respectively  of  the  Attic  year.     These  were  the  "  country  Dionysia,"  the 
"Lenaea,"  the  "Anthesteria,"  and  the  "great  Dionysia." 

XXII.  The  "  country  Dionysia,"  (ra  /car'  aypovs  Aiovixna)  were  celebrated 
all  over  Attica  in  the  month  Poseideon,  which  included  the  latter  half 
of  December  and  the  first  half  of  January.     This  was  the  festival  of  the 
vintage,  which  is  still  in  some  places  postponed  to  December.1     The  Le- 
naa  (A^ro»«),  or  festival  of  the  wine-press,  was  held  in  the  month  Game- 
lion,  which  corresponded  to  part  of  January  and  February.     It  was,  like 
the  rural  Dionysia,  a  vintage  festival ;  but  it  differed  from  them  in  being 
confined  to  a  particular  spot  in  the  city  of  Athens,  called  the  Lenaon,  where 
the  first  wine-press  (ATJI^S)  was  erected.     The  Anthesteria  (ra  3A»/0e<rT7jpta7 
ra  eV  AI/J.VCUS)  were  held  on  the  eleventh,  twelfth,  and  thirteenth  days  of 
the  month  Anthesterion,  corresponding  to  part  of  February  and  March. 
This  was  not  a  vintage  festival  like  the  former  two.     The  new  wine  was 
drawn  from  the  cask  on  the  first  day  of  the  feast  (Fhfloryja),  and  tasted  on 
the  second  day  (XJes) :  the  third  day  was  called  Xvrpot,  on  account  of  the 
banqueting  which  went  on  then.     The  great  Dionysia  (ra  eV  &rrei,  ra  Kar" 
aarv,  ra  aurrucd)  were  celebrated  between  the  eighth  and  eighteenth  of 
the  month  Elaphebolion,  corresponding  to  part  of  March  and  April.    This 
festival  is  always  meant  when  the  Dionysia  are  mentioned  without  any 
qualifying  epithet. 

XXIII.  At  the  first,  second,  and  fourth  of  these  festivals,  it  is  known 
that  theatrical  exhibitions  took  place.     The  exhibitions  at  the  country 
Dionysia  were  generally  of  old  pieces  ;  indeed,  there  is  no  instance  of  a 
play  being  acted  on  those  occasions  for  the  first  time,  at  least  after  the 
Greek  drama  had  arrived  at  perfection.     At  the  Lenaea  and  the  great 
Dionysia,  both  tragedies  and  comedies  were  performed  ;2  at  the  latter,  the 
tragedies,  at  least,  were  always  new  pieces ;  the  instances  in  the  didas- 
calice,  which  have  come  down  to  us,  of  representations  at  the  Lenaea  are 
indeed  always  of  new  pieces,  but  from  the  manner  in  which  the  exhibi 
tion  of  new  tragedies  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  city  festival, 
we  must  conclude  that  repetitions  were  allowed  at  the  Lenaea,  as  well 
as  at  the  country  Dionysia.     The  month  Elaphebolion  may  have  been  se 
lected  for  the  representation  of  new  tragedies,  because  Athens  was  then 
full  of  the  dependent  allies,  who  came  at  that  time  to  pay  the  tributes ; 
whereas  the  Athenians  alone  were  present  at  the  Lenaea.     It  does  not 
appear  that  there  were  any  theatrical  exhibitions  at  the  Anthesteria  ;  it 
is,  however,  at  least  probable  that  the  tragedians  read  to  a  select  audi 
ence  at  the  Anthesteria  the  tragedies  which  they  had  composed  for  the 

1  Philol.  Mus.,  ii.,p.296.  2  Demosth.,  Mid.,  p.  517. 

L 


162  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

festival  in  the  following  month,  or  perhaps  contests  took  place  then,  and 
the  intervening  month  was  employed  in  perfecting  the  actors  and  chorus 
in  their  parts.1 

XXIV.  In  considering  next  the  means  of  performance,  we  must  recall 
to  mind  the  different  origins  of  the  two  constituent  parts  of  a  Greek  dra 
ma — the  chorus  and  the  dialogue.     Choruses  were  originally  composed 
of  the  whole  population.     When,  however,  in  process  of  time,  the  fine 
arts  became  more  cultivated,  the  duties  of  this  branch  of  worship  devolved 
upon  a  few,  and  ultimately  upon  one,  who  bore  the  whole  expense,  when 
paid  actors  were  employed.2     This  person,  who  was  called  the  Choragus, 
was  considered  as  the  religious  representative  of  the  whole  people,  and 
was  said  to  do  the  state's  work  for  it  (\eiTovp7e«/).     It  was  the  business 
of  the  choragus3  to  provide  the  chorus  in  all  plays,  whether  tragic  or 
comic,  and  also  the  lyric  choruses  of  men  and  boys,  cyclian  dancers, 
&c. ;  he  was  selected  by  the  managers  of  his  tribe  (eTn/ieATjrat  <f>v\?js)  for 
the  choragy  which  had  come  round  to  it.     His  first  duty,  after  collecting 
his  chorus,  was  to  provide  and  pay  a  teacher  (xopoSiSacrKaAos),  who  in 
structed  them  in  the  songs  and  dances  which  they  had  to  perform,  and 
it  appears  that  the  choragi  drew  lots  for  the  first  choice  of  teachers.    The 
choragus  had  also  to  pay  the  musicians  and  singers  who  composed  the 
chorus,  and  was  allowed  to  press  children,  if  their  parents  did  not  give 
them  up  of  their  own  accord.     He  was  obliged  to  lodge  and  maintain  the 
chorus  till  the  time  of  performance,  and  to  supply  the  singers  with  such 
aliments  as  conduce  to  strengthen  the  voice. 

XXV.  In  the  laws  of  Solon,  the  age  prescribed  for  the  choragus  was 
forty  years ;  but  this  rule  does  not  appear  to  have  been  long  in  force. 
The  relative  expense  of  the  different  choruses,  in  the  time  of  Lysias,  is 
given  in  a  speech  of  that  orator.4    We  learn  from  this  that  the  tragic 
chorus  cost  nearly  twice  as  much  as  the  comic,  though  neither  of  the 
dramatic  choruses  was  so  expensive  as  the  chorus  of  men,  or  the  chorus 
of  flute-players.5     The  actors  were  the  representatives,  not  of  the  people, 
but  of  the  poet ;  consequently,  the  choragus  had  nothing  to  do  with  them. 
If  he  had  paid  for  them,  the  dramatic  choruses  would  surely  have  ex 
ceeded  in  expensiveness  all  the  others ;  besides,  the  actors  were  not  al 
lowed  to  the  ehoragi,  but  to  the  poets  ;  and  were,  therefore,  paid  either 
by  these,  or,  as  is  more  likely,  by  the  state. 

XXVI.  When  a  dramatist  had  made  up  his  mind  to  bring  out  a  play, 
he  applied,  if  he  intended  to  represent  at  the  Lenaea,  to  the  king-archon, 
and  if  at  the  greater  Dionysia,  to  the  chief  archon,  for  a  chorus,  which 
was  given  to  him  if  his  piece  was  considered  worthy  of  it.     Along  with 
this  chorus  he  received  three  actors  by  lot,  and  these  he  taught  independ 
ently  of  the  choragus,  who  confined  his  attentions  to  the  chorus.     If  suc 
cessful,  he  chose  his  own  actors  for  the  following  year.6     When  the  day 
appointed  for  the  trial  came  on,  they  united  their  efforts,  and  endeavored 

1   Philol.  Mus.,  ii.,p.  292,  seqq.  2  Buttmann  ad  Demosth.  Mid.,  p.  37. 

3  Bdckh,  Public  Econ.  of  Athens,  vol.  ii.,  p.  207,  seqq.,  Engl.  transl. 

4  Lys.,  'ATTOA.  SwpoS.,  p.  698  ;  Bentley,  Phal.,  p.  360.  5  Demosth.,  Mid.,  p.  565. 
f>  Hesych.,  s.  V. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  163 

to  gain  the  prize  by  a  combination  of  the  best-taught  actors  with  the  most 
sumptuously  dressed  and  most  diligently  exercised  chorus.  That  the 
exertions  of  the  choragus  and  the  actors  were  often  as  influential  with 
the  judges  as  the  beauty  of  the  poem,  can  not  be  doubted,  when  we  have 
so  many  instances  of  the  ill  success  of  the  best  dramatists. 

XXVII.  The  judges  were  appointed  by  lot,  and  were  generally,  but  not 
always,  five  in  number.1     The  archon  administered  an  oath  to  them ; 
and,  in  the  case  of  the  cyclian  chorus,  partiality  or  injustice  was  punish 
able  by  fine.2     The  successful  poet  was  crowned  with  ivy  (with  which 
his  choragus  and  performers  were  also  adorned),3  and  his  name  was  pro 
claimed  before  the  audience.     The  choragus  who  had  exhibited  the  best 
musical  or  theatrical  entertainment  generally  received  a  tripod  as  a  re 
ward  or  prize.     This  he  was  at  the  expense  of  consecrating,  and  in  some 
cases  built  the  monument  on  which  it  was  placed.     Thus  the  beautiful 
choragic  monument  of  Lysicrates,  which  is  still  standing  at  Athens,  was 
undoubtedly  surmounted  by  a  tripod,  and  the  statue  of  Bacchus,  in  a  sit 
ting  posture,  which  was  on  the  top  of  the  choragic  monument  of  Thrasyl- 
lus,  probably  supported  the  tripod  on  its  knees.     Such,  at  least,  seems  to 
have  been  the  intention  of  the  holes  drilled  in  the  lap  of  the  figure.     The 
choragus,  in  comedy,  consecrated  the  equipments  of  his  chorus.     The 
successful  poet  commemorated  his  victory  with  a  feast.     As,  however, 
no  prize  drama  wras  permitted  to  be  represented  for  a  second  time  (with 
an  exception  in  favor  of  the  three  great  dramatists,  which  was  not  long 
in  operation),  the  poet's  glory  was  very  transient.     The  time  allowed  for 
the  representation  was  portioned  out  by  the  clepsydra,  and  seems  to  have 
been  dependent  upon  the  number  of  pieces  represented.     What  this  num 
ber  was  is  not  known.     It  is  probable,  howrever,  that  about  three  trilogies 
might  have  been  represented  on  one  day. 

XXVIII.  The  place  of  exhibition  was,  in  the  days  of  the  perfect  Greek 
drama,  the  great  stone  theatre  erected  within  the  Lenaeon,  or  inclosure 
sacred  to  Bacchus.     The  building  was  commenced  in  the  year  500  B.C., 
but  not  finished  until  about  381  B.C.,  wrhen  Lycurgus  was  manager  of  the 
treasury.     In  the  earlier  days  of  the  drama,  the  theatre  was  of  wood,  but 
an  accident  having  occurred  at  the  representation  of  some  plays  of  JEs- 
chylus  and  Pratinas,  the  stone  theatre  was  commenced  in  its  stead.*   The 
student  who  wishes  to  acquire  an  adequate  notion  of  the  Greek  theatre 
must  not  forget  that  it  was  only  an  improvement  upon  the  mode  of  rep 
resentation  adopted  by  Thespis,  which  it  resembled  in  its  general  features. 
The  two  original  elements  were  the  &v/j.e\T),  or  altar  of  Bacchus,  round 
which  the  cyclic  chorus  danced,5  and  the  A.oyeTo*',  or  stage,  from  which 
the  actor  spoke  ;  it  wras  the  representative  of  the  wooden  table  from  which 
the  earliest  actor  addressed  his  chorus,6  and  was  also  called  oicpifias. 
But  in  the  great  stone  theatres,  in  wrhich  the  perfect  Greek  dramas  were 
represented,  these  two  simple  materials  for  the  exhibition  of  a  play  were 


1  Maussac.,  Diss.  Crit.,  p.  204.  2  Mschin.  c.  Ctcs.,  (/  85. 

3  Blomfield,  in  Mus.  Crit.,  ii.,  p.  88.  *  Liban.,  Arg.  Demosth.  Olynth.,  \. 

*>  Muller,  Anhang  zum.  Buck,  JKsch.  Eumen.,  p.  35.  6  Pollux,  iv.,  123. 


164 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


surrounded  by  a  mass  of  buildings,  and  subordinated  to  other  details  of  a 
very  artificial  and  complicated  description. 

XXIX.  In  building  a  theatre,1  the  Greeks  always  availed  themselves  of 
the  slope  of  a  hill,  which  enabled  them  to  give  the  necessary  elevation  to 
the  back  rows  of  seats,  without  those  enormous  substructions  which  we 
find  in  Roman  theatres.  If  the  hill  was  rocky,  semicircles  of  steps,  rising 
tier  above  tier,  were  hewn  out  of  the  living  material.  If  the  ground  was 
soft,  a  similar  excavation  of  certain  dimensions  was  made  in  the  slope 
of  the  hill,  and  afterward  lined  with  rows  of  stone  benches.  Even  when 
the  former  plan  was  practicable,  the  steps  were  frequently  faced  with  cop 
ings  of  marble.  This  was  the  case  with  the  theatre  of  Bacchus  at  Athens, 
which  stood  on  the  southeastern  side  of  the  rocky  Acropolis.  This  semi 
circular  pit,  surrounded  by  seats  on  all  sides  but  one,  and  in  part  filled  by 
them,  was  called  the  noiXov  (in  Latin,  cavea),  and  was  assigned  to  the  au 
dience.  At  the  top  it  was  inclosed  by  a  lofty  portico  and  balustraded  ter 
race  (marked  c  in  the  subjoined  plan) : 


XXX.  Concentric  with  this  circular  arc,  and  at  the  foot  of  the  lowest 
range  of  seats,  was  the  boundary  line  of  the  orchestra  (opx-fiffrpa),  or 
"  dancing-place,"  which  was  given  up  to  the  chorus.  If  we  complete  the 

1  On  the  structure  of  ancient  theatres  generally,  consult  Wicscler,  Theatcrgcbciude, 
&c.  Gutting.,  1851,  4to. 


ATTIC     PERIOD. 


165 


circle  of  the  orchestra,  and  draw  a  tangent  to  it  at  the  point  most  removed 
from  the  audience,  this  line  will  give  the  position  of  the  scene,  <r/o]Hj,  or 
"  covered  building,"  which  presented  to  the  view  of  the  spectators  a  lofty 
facade  of  hewn  stone,  susceptible  of  such  modifications  as  the  different 
plays  rendered  suitable.  In  front  of  this  scene  was  a  narrow  stage,  called, 
therefore,  the  irpoo-K-fiviov  (proscenium),  and  marked  /  in  our  plan.  It  was 
indicated  by  the  parallel  side  of  a  square,  inscribed  in  the  orchestral  circle, 
but  extended  to  the  full  length  of  the  scene  on  both  sides.  Another  par 
allel,  at  a  greater  distance  behind  the  scene,  gave  the  portico,  which  formed 
the  lower  front  of  the  whole  building. 

XXXI.  The  KO?AOJ/,  or  cavea,  was  divided  into  two  or  more  flights  of  steps 
or  seats  by  the  Sia^/j-ara  (in  Latin,  pracinctiones),  marked  bib  on  the  plan, 
which  were  broad  belts,  concentric  with  the  upper  terrace,  and  with  the 
boundary  line  of  the  orchestra,  and  which  served  both  as  lobbies  and 
landings.     The  steps  or  seats  of  the  KOI\OV  were  again  subdivided  trans 
versely  into  masses  called  /cep/ciSes  (cunei),  or  "  wedges,"  marked  aaa,  by 
stairs,  Khifjutices,  running  from  one  Siafoua  to  another,  and  converging  to 
the  centre  of  the  orchestra.     Different  parts  of  the  theatre  received  dif 
ferent  names  from  the  class  of  spectators  to  whom  they  were  appropria 
ted.    Thus  the  lower  seats,  nearest  to  the  orchestra,  which  were  assigned 
to  the  members  of  the  senate  (0ovA^)  and  others  who  had  a  right  to  re 
served  seats  (-n-poeSpia),  were  called  the  povXevriKhs  rc^-os,1  and,  again,  the 
young  men  sat  together  in  the  e'^fr/cbs  r6iros.2     The  spectators  entered 
either  from  the  hill  above  by  door-ways  in  the  upper  portico,  or  by  stair 
cases  in  the  wings  of  the  lower  facade. 

XXXII.  The  orchestra  was  a  levelled  space,  twelve  feet  lower  than 
the  front  seats  of  the  KO"I\OV,  by  which  it  was  bounded.     Six  feet  above 
this  was  a  boarded  platform,  which  did  not  cover  the  whole  area  of  the 
orchestra,  but  terminated  where  the  line  of  view  from  the  central  cunei 
was  intercepted  by  the  boundary  line.     It  ran,  however,  to  the  right  and 
left  of  the  spectators'  benches  till  it  reached  the  sides  of  the  scene.    The 
main  part  of  this  platform,  as  well  as  an  altar  of  Bacchus  (d)  in  the  centre 
of  the  orchestral  circle,  was  called  the  ^u^ue'A^  (thymele).     The  segment 
of  the  orchestra  not  covered  by  this  platform  was  termed  the  Kovi<rrpa 
(arena),  or  "  place  of  sand."     In  front  of  the  elevated  scene,  and  six  feet 
higher  than  the  platform  in  the  orchestra  (that  is,  on  the  same  level  with 
the  lowest  range  of  seats),  was  the  irpovKfyiov,  already  mentioned,  and 
called  also  the  \oyeiov  (in  Latin,  pulpituni),  or  "  speaking-stage."     There 
was  a  double  flight  of  steps  (K\i/j.aKT7jpes),  from  the  Kovivrpa  to  the  platform 
in  the  orchestra,  and  another  of  a  similar  description  from  this  orchestral 
platform  to  the  trpoffK-fiviov,  or  real  stage.     These  last  are  seen  in  our  plan 
on  either  side.     There  were  also  two  other  flights  of  steps  leading  to  the 
orchestral  platform  from  the  chambers  below  the  stage.     These  were 
called  xapc6j/ioi  /cAt^a/ces,  or  "  Charon's  stairs,"  and  were  used  for  the  en 
trance  of  spectres  from  the  Lower  World,  and  for  the  ghostly  apparitions 
of  the  departed.     The  regular  entrances  of  the  chorus  were  by  the  Trdp- 
oSoi,  or  broad  passages,  on  each  side,  between  the  projecting  wings  of  the 

1  Aristoph.  Av.,  794.  2  Schol.  ad  Aristoph.,  I.  c. 


166  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

stage  and  the  seats  of  the  spectators,  and  which  are  marked  ee  on  OUT 
plan. 

XXXIII.  It  does  not  appear  that  the  stage  (TrpoffKfaiov,  XoytTiov}  extend 
ed  farther  to  the  right  or  left  than  the  scene  or  elevated  centre  of  the 
The  parts  of  the  facade  on  either  side  of  the  stage  were  called 
ia,1  a  name  which  was  also  given  to  the  chambers  behind  the 
whole  range  of  scene-buildings.  The  front  and  sides  of  the  \oyelov  were 
called  v-jroffK7]via,  and  this  name  was  given  also  to  the  chambers  below 
the  stage.  The  walls  of  the  irapaa 'trivia  and  vTrocrKyvia  were  not  liable  to 
change  of  decoration,  but  were  constantly  adorned  with  statues  and  other 
architectural  adjuncts.2  The  scene  itself  was  altered  to  meet  the  emerg 
encies  of  the  case.  As  a  general  rule,  it  represented  a  public  building 
with  three  entrances  (efcoSot).  That  in  the  centre  belonged,  as  we  have 
already  remarked,  to  the  principal  personage  in  the  play  ;  that  on  the  right 
introduced  the  second  personage ;  while  the  inferior  characters  entered 
by  the  door  on  the  left  hand.  Behind  the  central  etsoSos  was  a  chamber, 
wrhich  might  be  opened  to  the  spectators'  view  by  a  contrivance  called 
the  iKKi>K\r]fj.a  or  Qtaa-rpa.  Thus  the  actions  or  spectacles  which  belonged 
to  the  interior  of  the  house  were  sometimes  openly  exhibited.  For  ex 
ample,  in  the  Agamemnon  of  ^Eschylus,  Clytemnestra  was  seen  standing 
over  the  body  of  her  murdered  husband ;  and  in  the  Acharnians  of  Aris 
tophanes,  Euripides  was  discovered  in  his  study. 

XXXIV.  Before  the  -jrdpoSos,  on  either  side,  stood  a  triangular  prism, 
or  side-scene,  called  Trepia/cros,2  which  moved  on  a  pivot,  and  not  only  in 
dicated  the  different  regions  supposed  to  lie  in  the  neighborhood  of  the 
scene,  but  was  also  made  use  of  as  a  machine  for  introducing  suddenly 
sea  and  river  gods,  and  other  incidental  appearances.  The  theatre  at 
Athens,  being  built  on  the  southeastern  side  of  the  Acropolis,  was  so  sit 
uated  that  a  person  standing  on  the  stage  saw  the  greater  part  of  the 
city  and  the  harbor  on  his  left,  and  the  country  of  Attica  on  his  right. 
Hence  a  man  who  entered  on  the  right  by  the  parascenia  was  invariably 
understood  to  come  from  the  country,  or  from  afar ;  on  the  left,  from  the 
city  or  the  neighborhood.  As  the  right-hand  passage,  or  Sp6/j.os,  therefore, 
represented  the  road  to  the  country,  and  the  left-hand  one  that  which  led 
to  the  city,  the  changes  of  scene  effected  by  the  revolutions  of  the  right- 
hand  TTfpiaKTos  were  distant  views  painted  in  perspective  ;  while  those  on 
the  left  were  pictures  of  single  objects  supposed  to  be  close  at  hand. 
Changes  of  scene  were  very  seldom  necessary  in  ancient  tragedy.  The 
Greek  tragedies  are  so  constructed,  that  the  speeches  and  actions  of 
which  they  are  mainly  composed  might  with  perfect  propriety  pass  on 
one  spot,  and,  indeed,  ought  generally  to  pass  in  the  court  in  front  of  the 
royal  dwelling.  The  actions  to  which  no  speech  is  attached,  and  which 
do  not  serve  to  develop  thoughts  and  feelings  (such  as  Eteocles'  combat 
with  his  brother  ;  the  murder  of  Agamemnon  ;  Antigone's  performance 
of  the  obsequies  of  Polynices,  &c.),  are  imagined  to  pass  behind  or  with 
out  the  scene,  and  are  only  related  on  the  stage.  Hence  the  import- 

1  On  the  Trapaoxijvta,  consult  Meineke,  Frag.  Com.  Grac.,  vol.  iv.  ;  Epim.,  vii.,  p.  722, 
seqq.  2  Pollux,  iv.,  124.  3  Vitruv.,  v.,  7  ;  Pollux,  iv.,  12G. 


ATTIC      PERIOD. 


167 


ance  of  the  parts  of  messengers  and  heralds  in  ancient  tragedy.  The 
poet  was  not  influenced  only  by  the  reason  given  by  Horace,1  namely, 
that  bloody  spectacles  and  incredible  events  excite  less  horror  and  doubt 
when  related,  and  ought,  therefore,  not  to  be  produced  on  the  stage  • 
there  was  also  the  far  deeper  general  reason,  that  it  is  never  the  out 
ward  act  with  which  the  interest  of  ancient  tragedy  is  most  intimately 
bound  up.  The  action  which  forms  the  basis  of  every  tragedy  of  those 
times  is  internal  and  spiritual ;  the  reflections,  resolutions,  feelings,  the 
mental  or  moral  phenomena,  which  can  be  expressed  in  speech,  are  de 
veloped  on  the  stage.  For  outward  action,  which  is  generally  mute,  or, 
at  all  events,  can  not  be  adequately  represented  by  words,  the  epic  form 
— narration — is  the  only  appropriate  vehicle.  Exceptions,  such  as  the 
chaining  of  Prometheus,  and  the  suicide  of  Ajax,  are  rather  apparent 
than  real,  and,  indeed,  serve  to  confirm  the  general  rule  ;  since  it  is  only 
on  account  of  the  peculiar  psychological  state  of  Prometheus  when  bound, 
and  of  Ajax  at  the  time  of  his  suicide,  that  the  outward  acts  are  brought 
upon  the  stage.  Moreover,  the  costume  of  tragic  actors  was  calculated 
for  impressive  declamation,  and  not  for  action.  The  lengthened  and 
stuffed-out  figures  of  the  tragic  actors  would  have  had  an  awkward,  not 
to  say  a  ludicrous  effect  in  combat  or  other  violent  action.  From  the 
sublime  to  the  ridiculous  would  here  have  been  but  one  step,  which  an 
cient  tragedy  carefully  avoided  risking.2 

XXXV.  The  theatre  at  Athens  was  well  supplied  with  machinery  cal 
culated  to  produce  startling  effects.  Besides  the  irepiaKToi,  which  were 
used  occasionally  to  introduce  a  sea-deity  on  his  fish-tailed  steed,  or  a 
river-god  with  his  urn,  there  was  the  freoAoyelbi/,  a  platform  surrounded 
by  clouds,  and  suspended  from  the  top  of  the  central  scene,  whence  the 
deities  conversed  with  the  actors  or  chorus.  Sometimes  they  were  in 
troduced  near  the  left  parodus,  close  to  the  periaktus,  by  means  of  a  crane 
turning  on  a  pivot,  which  was  called  the  fj.ijxav^.3  The  yepavos  was  a 
contrivance  for  snatching  up  an  actor  from  the  stage  and  raising  him  to 
the  &eoXo7e?oj/,  and,  by  means  of  the  atwpai,  an  arrangement  of  ropes  and 
pulleys,  Bellerophon  or  Trygaeus  could  fly  across  the  stage.  Then  there 
was  the  ppovrelov,  a  contrivance  for  imitating  the  sound  of  thunder.  It 
seems  to  have  consisted  of  bladders  full  of  pebbles,  which  were  rolled 
over  sheets  of  copper  laid  out  in  the  viroffK-r}via.  Again,  the  appearance 
of  lightning  was  produced  by  means  of  a  periaktus,  or  triangular  prism  of 
mirrors  placed  in  the  SrsoXoyeiov.  This  place  was  called  the  Kepowoa/coTr- 
fiov.  It  may  be  inferred,  too,  that  the  orchestra  near  the  stage  was  oc 
casionally  supposed  to  represent  water.  Thus,  in  the  "  Frogs,"  Bacchus 
rows  in  front  of  the  \oyciov  to  the  melodious  croakings  of  the  chorus 
which  swims  around  his  boat.  From  the  enormous  size  of  the  theatre 
at  Athens,  which  is  said  to  have  contained  30,000  spectators,4  it  became 
necessary  to  employ  the  principles  of  acoustics  to  a  considerable  extent. 
All  round  the  ttoiXov  were  bell-shaped  vessels  of  bronze,  called  r/x6"^ 
placed  in  an  inverted  position,  and  resting  on  pedestals,  wrhich  received 

1  Ep.  ad  Pis.,  180,  seqq.          *  Midler,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  307,  seq.         3  Pollux,  iv.,  128. 
*  Plato,  Sympos.,  175,  E.     Compare  Wordsworth,  Athens  and  Attica,  p.  92.  seqq. 


168  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

and  distributed  the  vibrations  of  sound.  In  some  theatres,  though  not  in 
that  of  Athens,  these  r?xe"»  were  placed  in  niches  excavated  for  the  pur 
pose,  The  difficulty  of  hearing  must  have  been  greatly  increased  by  the 
want  of  a  roof  to  the  KOI\OV . 

XXXVI.  The  chorus  was  supposed  to  be  a  lochus  of  soldiers  in  battle 
array.     In  the  dithyrambic  or  cyclic  chorus  of  fifty,  this  military  arrange 
ment  was  not  practicable  ;  but  when  the  original  choral  elements  had  be 
come  more  deeply  enrooted  in  the  worship  of  Bacchus,  and  the  three  prin 
cipal  Apollonian  dances  were  transferred  to  the  worship  of  that  god,  the 
dramatic  choruses  became,  like  them,  quadrangular,  and  were  arranged 
in  military  rank  and  file.     The  number  of  the  tragic  chorus  for  the  whole 
trilogy  appears  to  have  been  50  ;  the  comic  chorus  consisted  of  24.    The 
chorus  of  the  tetralogy  was  broken  into  four  sub-choruses,  two  of  15,  one 
of  12,  and  a  satyric  chorus  of  8,  as  appears  from  the  distribution  in  the 
remaining  trilogy.     When  the  chorus  of  15  entered  in  ranks  three  abreast, 
it  was  said  to  be  divided  Kara  fryd :  when  it  was  distributed  into  three 
files  of  five,  it  was  said  to  be  Kara  ffroixovs.     The  same  military  origin 
explains  the  fact  that  the  anapaestic  measure  was  generally,  if  not  al 
ways,  adopted  for  the  opening  choral  song ;  for  this  metre,  as  we  have 
before  seen,  was  also  used  in  the  Dorian  marching-songs.     The  muster 
of  the  cnorus  round  the  Thymele  shows  that  the  chorus  was  Bacchic  as 
well  as  military ;  the  mixture  of  lyric  and  flute  music  points  to  the  same 
union  of  two  worships ;    and  in  the  strophic  and  antistrophic  form  of 
most  of  the  choral  odes  we  discern  the  traces  of  the  choral  improvements 
of  Stesichorus. 

XXXVII.  In  the  life  of  antiquity,  every  thing  great  and  important,  all 
the  main  actions  of  family  or  political  interest,  passed  in  the  open  air  and 
in  the  view  of  men.     Even  social  meetings  took  place  rather  in  public 
halls,  in  market-places  and  streets,  than  in  rooms  and  chambers  ;  and  the 
habits  and  actions,  which  were  confined  to  the  interior  of  a  house,  were 
never  regarded  as  forming  subjects  for  public  observation.     Accordingly, 
it  was  necessary  that  the  action  of  the  drama  should  come  forth  from  the 
interior  of  the  house  ;  and  tragic  poets  were  compelled  to  comply  strictly 
with  this  condition  in  the  invention  and  plan  of  their  dramatic  composi 
tions.     The  heroic  personages,  when  about  to  give  utterance  to  their 
thoughts  and  feelings,  came  forth  into  the  court  in  front  of  their  houses. 
From  the  other  side  came  the  chorus,  out  of  the  city  or  district  in  which 
the  principal  persons  dwelt ;   they  assembled,  as  friends  or  neighbors 
might,  to  offer  their  counsel  or  their  sympathy  to  the  principal  actors  on 
the  stage,  on  some  open  space ;  often  a  market-place  designed  for  public 
meetings ;  such  as,  in  the  monarchical  times  of  Greece,  was  commonly 
attached  to  the  prince's  palace.     Far  from  shocking  received  notions,  the 
performance  of  choral  dances  in  this  place  was  quite  in  accordance  with 
Greek  usages.     Anciently  these  market-places  were  specially  designed 
for  numerous  popular  choruses  ;  they  even  themselves  bore  the  name  of 
chorus.1     As  regards  the  chorus  itself,  considered  in  the  light  of  an  ele 
ment  of  the  drama,  we  must  conceive  of  it,  with  Schlegel,  as  the  person- 

'  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  302. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  169 

ification  of  the  thought  inspired  by  the  represented  action  ;  in  other  words, 
it  often  expresses  the  reflections  of  a  dispassionate  and  right-minded 
spectator,  and  inculcates  the  lessons  of  morality  and  resignation  to  the 
will  of  heaven,  taught  by  the  occurrences  of  the  piece  in  which  it  is  en 
gaged.  Besides  this,  the  chorus  enabled  the  poet  to  produce  an  image  of 
the  "  council  of  elders,"  which  existed  under  the  heroic  governments,  and 
under  whose  advice  and  in  whose  presence  the  ancient  princes  of  the 
Greek  tragedy  generally  acted.  This  image  was  the  more  striking  and 
vivid,  inasmuch  as  the  chorus  was  taken  from  the  people  at  large,  and 
did  not  at  all  differ  from  the  appearance  and  stature  of  ordinary  men  ;  so 
that  the  contrast  or  relation  between  them  and  the  actors  was  the  same 
as  that  of  the  Homeric  Aaot  and  fo/a/cres.  Lastly,  the  choral  songs  pro 
duced  an  agreeable  pause  in  the  action,  breaking  the  piece  into  parts, 
while  they  presented  to  the  spectator  a  lyrical  and  musical  expression  of 
his  own  emotions,  or  suggested  to  him  lofty  thoughts  and  great  argu 
ments.  As  Schlegel  says,  the  chorus  was  the  spectator  idealized.1 

XXXVIII.  The  great  size  of  the  theatre  gave  occasion  to  another  re 
markable  difference  between  the  exhibitions  of  the  ancients  and  our  own. 
Every  one  of  the  actors  in  tragedy  wore  the  thick-soled  cothurnus  or 
hunting-boot  (ttdOopvos,  apj3u\7j).     This  gave  additional  height  to  the  per 
son,  while  his  body  and  limbs  were  also  stuffed  and  padded  to  a  corre 
sponding  size,  and  his  head  was  surmounted  by  a  colossal  mask  suited  to 
the  character  which  he  bore.     Masks  (-rrp6suTra,  irposwireTa)  appear  to  have 
originated  in  the  taste  for  mumming  and  disguises  of  all  sorts  prevalent 
at  the  Bacchic  festivals.     In  the  earlier  periods  of  the  drama,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  the  actors  smeared  their  faces  with  the  lees  of  wine,  then 
substituted  a  species  of  pigment,  and  subsequently  adopted  a  mask  of 
linen.     The  regular  mask  was  introduced  by  ^schylus,  and  still  farther 
improved  by  Sophocles.     With  regard  to  the  material  of  which  it  was 
composed,  a  difference  of  opinion  exists.    According  to  some,  it  was  made 
of  bronze  or  copper.     This,  however,  is  scarcely  credible,  since,  when 
taken  in  connection  with  the  other  parts  of  the  mask,  which  actually  cov 
ered  the  whole  head  and  came  down  as  far  as  the  shoulders,  it  would 
make  the  entire  apparatus  too  unwieldy.     According  to  others,  the  part 
which  covered  the  face  was  of  a  light  kind  of  wood,  which  seems  the 
more  reasonable  opinion.     Others  are  in  favor  of  thin  pipe-clay  or  terra 
cotta.     One  thing  is  pretty  certain,  that  such  metallic  specimens  as  have 
come  down  to  us  are  rather  to  be  regarded  simply  as  model  masks,  or  as 
works  of  art,  designed  by  the  artist  as  mere  ornaments.5 

XXXIX.  The  ancient  mask  was  so  constructed  as  not  only  to  add  to 
the  height  of  the  actor,  but  also  to  give  greater  power  to  the  voice.    The 
first  of  these  objects  was  effected  by  means  of  the  fyaos,  a  species  of  top 
knot,  forming  a  prolongation  of  the  mask,  the  hair  being  arranged  in  a" 
pyramidal  form,  like  the  roof  of  a  house,  or  the  Greek  letter  A,  and  hav 
ing  sometimes  a  bonnet  superadded.     For  the  purpose,  again,  of  giving 
more  power  to  the  voice,  the  mask  was  connected  with  a  tire  or  periwig 

eva.K-ri),  of  which  the  OJKOS  formed  part,  which  covered  the  whole 

Smith,  Diet.  Ant,,  s.  v.  Tragcedia.  2  St.  John,  Hellenes,  ii.,  p.  265. 

H 


170  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

head,  and  left  only  one  passage  for  the  voice,  indicated  by  the  half-opened 
mouth,  and  answering,  in  fact,  all  the  ends  of  a  speaking-trumpet,  whence 
the  Latin  name  for  a  mask,  persona  a  personando. 

XL.  The  mask  not  only  concealed  the  individual  features  of  well-known 
actors,  and  enabled  the  spectators  entirely  to  forget  the  performer  in  his 
part,  but  it  gave  to  his  whole  aspect  that  ideal  character  which  the  trage 
dy  of  antiquity  demanded.  The  tragic  mask  was  not,  indeed,  intention 
ally  ugly  and  caricatured,  like  the  comic,  but  the  half-open  mouth,  the 
large  eye-sockets,  the  sharply-defined  features,  in  which  every  charac 
teristic  was  presented  in  its  utmost  strength,  the  bright  and  hard  color 
ing,  were  calculated  to  produce  the  impression  of  a  being  agitated  by  the 
emotions  and  the  passions  of  human  nature  in  a  degree  far  above  the 
standard  of  ordinary  life.  The  unnatural  effect  which  a  set  and  uniform 
cast  of  features  would  produce  in  tragedy  of  varied  passion  and  action 
like  ours,  was  much  less  striking  in  ancient  tragedy,  wherein  the  princi 
pal  persons,  once  forcibly  possessed  by  certain  objects  and  emotions,  ap 
peared  throughout  the  whole  remaining  piece  in  a  state  of  mind  which 
was  become  the  habitual  and  fundamental  character  of  their  existence. 
It  is  possible  to  imagine  the  Orestes  of  JEschylus,  the  Ajax  of  Sophocles, 
the  Medea  of  Euripides,  throughout  the  whole  tragedy  with  the  same 
countenance,  though  this  would  be  difficult  to  assert  of  Hamlet,  or  any 
other  character  in  a  modern  drama.  But,  in  truth,  there  is  no  necessity 
for  supposing  that  the  actors  appeared  throughout  a  whole  play  with  the 
same  countenance,  for,  if  circumstances  required  it,  they  might  surely 
change  masks  during  the  intervals  between  the  acts  of  a  piece.  Thus, 
in  the  tragedy  of  Sophocles,  after  King  CEdipus  knows  the  extent  of  his 
calamity,  and  has  executed  the  bloody  punishment  upon  himself,  he  ap 
peared  in  a  different  mask  from  that  which  he  wore  in  the  confidence  of 
virtue  and  of  happiness.1 

XLI.  Not  only,  however,  were  the  masks  intended  to  personify  histor 
ical  or  mythological  personages,  designed  in  imitation  of  some  wrell- 
known  type,  handed  down  through  ages  by  the  poets,  painters,  and  sculp 
tors,  but  every  age  and  condition  of  life,  from  youth  to  decrepitude,  or 
from  the  hero  to  the  slave,  was  represented  by  an  appropriate  mask,  the 
characteristics  of  which  were  sufficiently  well  known  for  the  qutlity  and 
condition  of  the  personage  represented  to  be  immediately  recognized  by 
the  spectators  on  his  appearance  upon  the  stage  ;  and  even  the  OJKOS  be 
longing  to  each  particular  mask  had  a  settled  style  of  coiffure,  as  well 
known  as  the  features  it  accompanied.  The  color  of  the  hair,  also,  was 
fixed  in  each  particular  case.  No  wonder,  therefore,  that  the  greatest 
possible  care  was  bestowed  upon  the  manufacture  of  masks.  Julius  Pol 
lux  divides  the  tragic  masks  into  twenty-six  classes  ;2  the  comic  masks, 
however,  were  much  more  numerous. 

XLII.  The  performers  wore  long  striped  garments  reaching  to  the 
ground  (xtrwi/es  iroSrjpeis,  (rroXai),  which  were  serviceable  also  in  conceal 
ing  a  portion  of  the  cothurnus.  Over  these  were  thrown  upper  robes 
of  purple,  or  some  other  brilliant  color,  with  all  sorts 


Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  298.  *  Pollux,  iv.,  133,  »eqq. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  171 

of  gay  trimmings  and  gold  ornaments,  the  ordinary  attire  of  Bacchic  fes 
tal  processions  and  choral  dances.  Nor  was  the  Hercules  of  the  stage 
represented  as  the  sturdy  athletic  hero,  whose  huge  limbs  were  only  con 
cealed  by  a  lion's  hide  ;  he  appeared  in  the  rich  and  gaudy  dress  we  have 
described,  to  which  his  distinctive  attributes,  the  club  and  the  bow,  were 
merely  added.  The  dress  of  the  chorus  was  not  different  in  kind  from 
that  of  the  actors,  and  the  choragus  took  care  that  it  was  equally  splen 
did.  But  as  the  actors  represented  heroic  characters,  whereas  the  cho 
rus  was  merely  a  deputation  from  the  people  at  large,  and  in  fact  stood 
much  nearer  to  the  audience,  the  mask  was  omitted,  and  moreover,  while 
the  actors  wore  the  cothurnus,  the  chorus  appeared  in  their  usual  sandals. 
The  comic  actors,  for  the  same  reason,  were  content  with  the  soccus,  or 
thin-soled  shoe,  and  their  mask  had  no  (fy/cos.  They  often,  too,  wore  har 
lequinade  dresses,  with  trowsers  fitting  close  to  the  leg.1 

XLIII.  Aristotle,  or  the  grammarian  by  whom  his  treatise  on  Poetry 
has  been  interpolated,  informs  us2  that  every  Greek  tragedy  admitted  of 
the  following  subdivisions  :  the  prologue,  the  episodes,  the  exode,  which  ap 
plied  to  the  performances  of  the  actors,  and  the  parodus  and  stasima,  which 
belonged  to  the  chorus.  The  songs  from  the  stage  (TO  cbrb  O-/CT?^S),  and 
the  dirges  (KO^O'I),  are  peculiar  to  some  tragedies  only.  Besides  these, 
it  seems  that  there  was  occasionally  a  dancing  song  or  canzonet  of  a 
peculiar  nature.3  The  proper  entrance  of  the  chorus,  as  already  remark 
ed,  was  from  the  pafascenia,  by  one  of  the  parodi.  The  parodus  was  the 
song  which  the  choreutae  sang  as  they  moved,  probably  in  different  par 
ties,  along  the  side  entrances  of  the  orchestra.  It  was  generally  either 
interspersed  with  anapaests,  as  is  the  case  in  the  Antigone ;  or  preceded 
by  a  long  anapaestic  march,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Supplices  and  Agamem 
non.  Sometimes  this  anapaestic  march  was  followed  by  a  system  of  the 
cognate  Ionics  a  minore.*  This  we  find  in  the  Persce.  In  some  trage 
dies  there  was  no  parodus,  but  the  opening  of  the  play  found  the  chorus 
already  assembled  on  the  thymele,  and  prepared  to  sing  the  first  stasimon. 
Such  is  the  case  in  the  CEdipus  Tyrannus.  It  seems  probable  that  they 
then  entered  by  the  passage  under  the  seats. 

XLIV.  The  stasima  were  always  sung  by  the  chorus  when  it  was  either 
stationary  or  moving  on  the  same  limited  surface  around  the  altar  of  Bac 
chus,  and  with  its  front  to  the  stage.  The  places  of  the  choreutae  were 
marked  by  lines  on  the  stage  (Siaypd/jL/j-ara).  The  comic  chorus  sang  its 
parodus  and  its  stasima  in  the  same  manner  as  the  tragic  ;  but  they  were, 
as  pieces  of  poetry,  much  less  elaborate,  and  generally  much  shorter. 
The  main  performance  of  the  chorus  in  comedy  was  the  parabasis.  It 
was  an  address  to  the  audience  in  the  middle  of  the  play,  and  was  the 
most  immediate  representative  of  the  old  trochaic  or  anapaestic  address 
by  the  leader  of  the  phallic  song,  for  which  the  personal  lampoons  of 
Archilochus  furnished  the  model,  and  to  which  the  old  comedy  of  Athens 
was  mainly  indebted  for  its  origin.  This  parabasis,  or  "countermarch," 
was  so  called  because  the  chorus,  which  had  previously  stood  facing  the 

1  Milller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  296,  teqq. ;  Id.,  Eumen.,  32.  a  Arist.,  Poet.,  12. 

*  Donaldson,  Introd.  to  Antif.,  p,  xxxi.  *  Id.,  Gr.  Or.,  $  650. 


172  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

stage,  and  on  the  other  side  of  the  central  altar,  wheeled  about,  and  made 
a  movement  toward  the  spectators,  who  were  then  addressed  by  the 
coryphaeus  in  a  short  system  of  anapaests  or  trochees,  called  the 
riov,  and  this  was  followed  by  a  long  anapaestic  system,  termed 
"  suffocation,"  or  paKpov,  "  long,"  from  the  effort  which  its  delivery  im 
posed  upon  the  reciter.  The  parabasis  is  often  followed  by  a  lyric  song 
in  honor  of  some  divinity,  and  this  by  a  short  system,  properly  of  sixteen 
trochaic  tetrameters,  which  is  called  the  eVi'p/^a,  or  "  supplement."  It 
contains  some  joking  addition  to  the  main  purport  of  the  parabasis. 

XLV.  There  were  regularly  never  more  than  three  actors  (viroKpirai, 
ayuvtffTai).  who  were  designated  as  respectively  the  first,  second,  and  third 
actor  (TrpwTaycwicrT-fis,  SevrfpayowHTTTis,  rpiTaycovtcrT-fis).  The  third  actor  in 
tragedy,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  was  first  added  by  Sophocles,  an 
addition  which  Cratinus  was  the  first  to  make  in  comedy.  Any  number 
of  mutes  (KU<PO,  Trp6s<aira)  might  appear  on  the  stage.  If  children  were  in 
troduced  as  speaking  or  singing  on  the  stage,  the  part  was  undertaken  by 
one  of  the  chorus,  who  stood  behind  the  scene,  and  it  was,  therefore, 
called  a  irapaffK^viov,  from  his  position,  or  irapaxopJiynfjia,  from  its  being 
something  beyond  the  proper  functions  of  the  chorus.  It  has  been  con 
cluded  by  Muller,1  that  a  fourth  actor  was  indispensable  to  the  proper  per 
formance  of  the  (Edipus  Coloneus,  an  opinion  which,  though  opposed  by 
some  eminent  scholars,2  seems  extremely  probable. 

XLVI.  The  narrowness  and  distance  of  the  stage  rendered  any  group 
ing  unadvisable.  The  arrangement  of  the  actors  was  that  of  a  proces 
sional  bas-relief.  Their  movements  were  slow,  their  gesticulations  ab 
rupt  and  angular,  and  their  delivery  a  sort  of  loud  and  deep-drawn  sing 
song,  which  resounded  throughout  the  immense  theatre.  They  probably 
neglected  every  thing  like  by-play,  and  making  points,  which  are  so  effect 
ive  on  the  modern  stage.  The  distance  at  which  the  spectators  wrere 
placed  would  prevent  them  from  seeing  those  little  movements,  and  hear 
ing  those  low  tones  which  have  made  the  fortune  of  many  a  modern  act 
or.  The  mask,  too,  precluded  all  attempts  at  varied  expression,  and  it  is 
probable  that  nothing  more  was  expected  from  the  performer  than  was 
looked  for  from  his  predecessor  the  rhapsodist,  namely,  good  recitation. 

XLVII.  The  rhythmical  systems  of  the  tragic  choruses  were  very  sim 
ple,  and  we  may  conclude  that  the  music  to  which  they  were  set  was 
equally  so.  The  dochmiac  metre,  which  is  regularly  found  in  the  xowot 
and  TOI  airb  (r/njvTjs,  would  admit  of  the  most  inartificial  of  plaintive  melo 
dies.  The  comic  choral  songs  very  frequently  introduce  the  easy  asynar- 
tete  combinations,3  which  were  so  much  used  by  Archilochus ;  and  we  find 
in  Aristophanes  a  very  curious  form  of  the  antispastic  metre,  the  inven 
tion  of  which  is  attributed  to  Eupolis.* 

XLVIII.  We  shall  conclude  with  a  few  observations  on  the  audience, 
and  on  the  social  position  of  the  actors.  For  the  first  few  years  after  the 
commencement  of  theatrical  performances  no  money  was  paid  for  ad 
mission  to  them  ;  but  after  a  time  (probably  about  B.C.  501)  it  was  found 

1  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  305.  2  Donaldson,  Theatre  of  the  Greeks,  p.  164. 

*  Id.,  Gr.  Or.,  $  666.  *  Id.  ib.,  $  677. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  173 

convenient  to  prevent  the  crowds  and  disturbances  occasioned  by  the  gra 
tuitous  admission  of  every  one  who  chose  to  come.  The  charge1  was  two 
oboli ;  but  lest  the  poorer  classes  should  be  excluded,  the  entrance-money 
was  given  to  any  person  who  might  choose  to  apply  for  it,  provided  his 
name  was  registered  in  the  book  of  the  citizens  (A^apx*^"  ypawaTew). 
The  lowest  and  best  seats  were  set  apart  for  the  magistrates,  the  mem 
bers  of  the  £ouA^,  or  senate,  and  all  such  persons  as  had  acquired  or  inher 
ited  a  right  to  front  seats  (trpofSpia).  It  is  probable  that  those  who  were 
entitled  to  reserved  places  at  the  theatre  had  also  tickets  of  admission 
provided  for  them.  The  entrance-money  was  paid  to  the  lessee  of  the 
theatre  (bearpcarns,  ^earpoTrwArjs,  apxireKrcav),  who  paid  the  rent  and  made 
the  necessary  repairs  out  of  the  proceeds.  The  distribution  of  the  ad 
mission  money,  or  frewpntdv,  as  it  was  called,  out  of  the  public  funds,  was 
set  on  foot  by  Pericles,  at  the  suggestion  of  Demonides  of  GEa ;  its  appli 
cation  was  soon  extended,  till  it  became  a  regular  largess  from  the  dema 
gogues  to  the  mob  at  all  the  great  festivals  ;  and  well  might  the  patriot 
Demosthenes  lift  up  his  voice  against  a  practice,  which  was  in  the  end 
nothing  but  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  the  profligate  orators,  who 
pandered  to  the  worst  passions  of  the  people. 

XLIX.  The  lessee  sometimes  gave  a  gratuitous  exhibition,  in  which 
case  tickets  of  admission  were  distributed.2  Any  citizen  might  buy  tick 
ets  for  a  stranger  residing  at  Athens.3  The  question  whether  in  Greece, 
and  more  especially  at  Athens,  women  were  present  at  tragedies,  is  one 
of  those  which  have  given  rise  to  much  discussion  among  modern  schol 
ars,  as  we  have  scarcely  any  passage  in  ancient  writers  in  which  the  pres 
ence  of  women  is  stated  as  a  positive  fact.  But  Jacobs*  and  Passow5 
have  placed  it  almost  beyond  a  doubt,  from  the  various  allusions  made 
by  ancient  writers,  that  women  were  allowed  to  be  present  during  the  per 
formance  of  tragedies.  This  opinion  is  now  perfectly  confirmed  by  a  pas 
sage  in  Athenaeus,6  which  has  been  quoted  by  Becker7  in  corroboration 
of  the  conclusion  to- which  the  above-mentioned  scholars  had  come.  We 
have,  however,  on  the  other  hand,  every  reason  to  believe  that  women 
were  not  present  at  comedies,  while  boys  might  be  present  both  at  trag 
edy  and  comedy.8  The  seats  which  women  occupied  in  the  Greek  the 
atres  were  in  the  highest  row  of  benches,  and  separated  from  those  of 
the  men.9 

L.  Theatrical  representations  at  Athens  began  early  in  the  morning,  or 
after  breakfast  ;10  and  when  the  concourse  of  people  was  expected  to  be 
great,  persons  would  even  go  to  occupy  their  seats  in  the  night.  The 
theatres  had  no  roofs.  The  sun,  however,  could  not  be  very  troublesome 
to  the  actors,  as  they  were  in  a  great  measure  protected  by  the  buildings 
surrounding  the  stage,  and  the  spectators  protected  themselves  against 
it  by  hats  with  broad  brims.11  When  the  weather  was  fine,  especially  at 

1  Bockh,  Pub.  Econ.  of  Athens,  vol.  i.,  p.  289,  seqq.,  Engl.  trans. 

2  Theopkrast.,  Charact.,  xi.  3  Plat.,  Gorg.,  p.  502,  D;  Id.,  Leg.,  ii.,  p.  658,  D 
*  Vermiacht.  Schriften,  iv.,  p.  272.        *  Zeitschr.fur  die  Alterth.,  1837,  n.  29. 

6  Athen.,  xii.,  p.  534.  7  Charikles,  ii.,  p.  560. 

8  Theophr.,  Char.,  ix. ;  Aristoph.,  Nub.,  537.          9  Gottling,  Rh.  Mus.,  1834,  p.  103,  seqq 

10  Mschin.  c.  Ctes.,  p.  466;  Athen.,  xi.,  p.  464.     n  Suid.,  s.  v.  Trerao-os   and  Apa/cwf. 


174  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

the  Dionysiac  festivals  in  the  spring,  the  people  appeared  with  garlands 
on  their  heads  ;  when  it  was  cold,  as  at  the  Lenaea  in  January,  they  used 
to  wrap  themselves  up  in  their  cloaks.1  When  a  storm  or  a  shower  of 
rain  came  on  suddenly,  the  spectators  took  refuge  in  the  porticoes  behind 
the  stage,  or  in  those  above  the  uppermost  row  of  benches.  Those  who 
wished  to  sit  comfortably  brought  cushions  with  them.2  As  it  was  not 
unusual  for  the  theatrical  performances  to  last  from  ten  to  twelve  hours, 
the  spectators  required  refreshments,  and  we  find  that,  in  the  intervals 
between  the  several  plays,  they  used  to  take  wine  and  cakes.3 

LI.  The  Athenian  performers  were  much  esteemed  all  over  Greece  ; 
they  took  great  pains  about  their  bodily  exercises,  and  dieted  themselves 
in  order  to  keep  their  voices  clear  and  strong.*  They  appear  to  have 
been  generally  paid  by  the  state ;  in  the  country  exhibitions,  however, 
two  actors  would  occasionally  pay  the  wages  of  their  Tpm^owtrrfc.5  The 
salary  of  actors  was  often  very  high,  and  Polus,  who  commonly  acted 
with  Tlepolemus  in  the  plays  of  Sophocles,  sometimes  earned  a  talent  by 
two  days'  performances.  The  histrionic  profession  was  not  thought  to 
carry  with  it  any  degradation.  The  actor  was  the  representative  of  the 
dramatist,  and  often  the  dramatist  himself.  Sophocles,  who  sometimes 
performed  in  his  own  plays,  was  a  person  of  the  highest  consideration ; 
the  actor  Aristodemus  went  on  an  embassy,  and  many  actors  took  a  lead 
in  the  public  assembly.  In  some  cases,  the  actors  were  not  only  recog 
nized  by  the  state,  but  controlled  and  directed  by  special  enactments. 
Thus,  according  to  the  law  brought  forward  by  the  orator  Lycurgus,  the 
actors  were  obliged  to  compare  the  acting  copies  of  the  plays  of  the  three 
great  tragedians  with  the  authentic  manuscripts  of  their  works,  preserved 
in  the  state  archives  ;  and  it  was  the  duty  of  the  public  secretary  to  see 
that  the  texts  were  accurately  collated.6 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 
FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD— continued. 

GREEK     TRAGEDIANS. 

I.  CHCERILUS  (XoipiAos)  or  CHGERILLUS  (Xotpi\\os),  of  Athens,  was  a 
tragic  poet,  contemporary  with  Thespis,  Phrynichus,  Pratinas,  ^schylus, 
and  even  with  Sophocles,  unless,  as  Welcker  supposes,  he  had  a  son  of 
the  same  name,  who  was  also  a  tragic  poet.7  His  first  appearance  as  a 
competitor  for  the  tragic  prize  was  in  B.C.  523,  in  the  reign  of  Hippar- 
chus,  when  Athens  was  becoming  the  centre  of  Greek  poetry  by  the  resi 
dence  there  of  Simonides,  Anacreon,  Lasus,  and  others.  This  was  twelve 
years  after  the  first  appearance  of  Thespis  in  the  tragic  contests ;  and  it 
is,  therefore,  not  improbable  that  Chcerilus  had  Thespis  for  an  antagonist. 

1  Suid.,  I.  c.  2  Theophr.,  Char  act.,  ii. 

3  Athen.,  xi.,  p.  464  ;  Aristot.,  Eth.  Nicom.,  x.,  5.  *  Cic.,  Orat.,  4. 

8  Demosth.,  De  Coron.,  p.  345,  Eekker. 

«  Pint.,  Vit.  X.  Orat.,  p.  841,  D,  p.  377,  Wyttenb.  7  Griech.  Trag.,  p.  892. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  175 

It  was  also  twelve  years  before  the  first  victory  of  Phrynichus  (B.C.  511). 
After  another  twelve  years,  Choerilus  came  into  competition  with  JEschy- 
lus,  when  the  latter  first  exhibited  (B.C.  499) ;  and  since  we  know  that 
JSschylus  did  not  carry  off  a  prize  till  sixteen  years  afterward,  the  prize 
of  this  contest  must  have  been  given  either  to  Chcerilus  or  to  Pratinas. 
Choerilus  was  still  held  in  high  estimation  in  the  year  483  B.C.,  after  he 
had  exhibited  tragedies  for  forty  years.  Of  the  character  of  Chceriius 
we  know  little  more  than  that,  during  a  long  life,  he  retained  a  good  de 
gree  of  popular  favor.  The  number  of  his  tragedies  was  150,  of  his  vic 
tories  13,1  being  exactly  the  number  of  victories  assigned  to  ^Eschylus. 
The  great  number  of  his  dramas  establishes  an  important  point,  namely, 
that  the  exhibition  of  tetralogies  commenced  early  in  the  time  of  Chceri 
lus  ;  for  new  tragedies  were  exhibited  at  Athens  only  twice  a  year,  and 
at  this  early  period  we  never  hear  of  tragedies  being  written  and  not  ex 
hibited,  but  rather  the  other  way.  In  fact,  it  is  the  general  opinion  that 
Choerilus  was  the  first  who  composed  written  tragedies,  and  that  even 
of  his  plays  the  greater  number  were  not  written.  The  poetical  charac 
ter  and  construction  of  the  plays  of  Chcerilus  probably  differed  but  little 
from  those  of  Thespis,  until  ^Eschylus  introduced  the  second  actor.  Of 
all  his  plays  we  have  no  remnant,  except  the  statement  by  Pausanias2  of 
a  mythological  genealogy  from  his  play  called  'AA^ir?;.3 

II.  PHRYNICHUS  (Qpfoixos),  an  Athenian,  was  one  of  the  poets  to  whom 
the  invention  of  tragedy  is  ascribed.  He  was  a  scholar  of  Thespis.*  The 
dates  of  his  birth  and  death  are  alike  unknown.  He  gained  his  first 
tragic  victory  B.C.  511,  twenty-four  years  after  Thespis  (B.C.  535), 
twelve  years  after  Choerilus  (B.C.  523),  and  twelve  years  before  JSschy- 
lus  (B.C.  499),  and  his  last  in  B.C.  476,  on  which  occasion  Themistocles 
was  his  choragus,5  and  recorded  the  event  by  an  inscription.  Phryni 
chus  must,  therefore,  have  flourished  at  least  35  years.  He  probably 
went,  like  other  poets  of  the  age,  to  the  court  of  Hiero  at  Syracuse,  and 
there  died.  Various  improvements  in  the  ancient  drama  are  ascribed  to 
Phrynichus.  He  introduced  female  masks,  paid  particular  attention  to 
the  dances  of  the  chorus,  and  for  the  light,  ludicrous  Bacchanalian  stories 
of  Thespis,  he  substituted  regular  and  serious  subjects,  taken  either  from 
the  Heroic  Age,  or  the  heroic  deeds  which  illustrated  the  history  of  his 
own  time.  In  these  he  aimed  not  so  much  to  amuse  the  audience  as 
to  move  their  feelings  ;  and  so  powerful  was  the  effect  of  his  tragedy  on 
the  capture  of  Miletus,  which  city  had  recently  been  taken  by  the  Per 
sians,  B.C.  494,  that  the  audience  burst  into  tears,  and  Phrynichus  was 
fined  1000  drachmae  for  having  recalled  so  forcibly  a  painful  recollection 
of  the  misfortunes  of  a  kindred  people.6  Phrynichus  seems  to  have  been 
chiefly  remarkable  for  the  sweetness  of  his  melodies,  and  the  great  va 
riety  and  cleverness  of  his  figure-dances.  The  Aristophanic  Agathon 
speaks  generally  of  the  beauty  of  his  dramas,  though,  of  course,  they  fell 
far  short  of  the  grandeur  of  yEschylus,  and  the  perfect  skill  of  Sophocles. 
In  the  dramas  of  Phrynichus  the  chorus  still  retained  the  principal  place, 

1  Suid.,  s.  v.  2  Paus.,  i.,  14,  2.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

*  Suid.,  s  v.  6  Plut.,  Tkemist.,  5.  6  Herod.,  vi.,  21. 


176  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

and  it  was  reserved  for  /Eschylus  and  Sophocles  to  bring  the  dialogue 
and  action  into  their  true  position.  The  names  of  several  tragedies  at 
tributed  to  Phrynichus  have  come  down  to  us,  but  it  is  probable  that  some 
of  these  belonged  to  other  poets.  The  few  fragments  of  Phrynichus  are 
given  by  Wagner,  in  his  Trag.  Grac.  Fragm.  (in  Didot's  Bibliothcca).1 

III.  PRATINAS  (nparivas),*  one  of  the  early  tragic  poets  at  Athens,  was 
a  native  of  Phlius,  and  therefore  by  birth  a  Dorian.     It  is  not  stated  at 
what  time  he  went  to  Athens,  but  he  was  older  than  JSschylus,  and 
younger  than  Chcerilus,  with  both  of  whom  he  competed  for  the  prize 
about  B.C.  500.     The  step  in  the  progress  of  the  art  which  was  ascribed 
to  Pratinas  was  the  separation  of  the  satyric  from  the  tragic  drama,3  to 
which  we  have  already  alluded.     His  plays  were  much  esteemed.     Pra 
tinas  also  ranked  high  among  the  lyric  as  well  as  among  the  dramatic 
poets  of  the  day.     He  cultivated  two  species  of  lyric  poetry,  the  hyp- 
orcheme  and  the  dithyramb,  of  which  the  former  was  closely  related  to 
the  satyric  drama  by  the  jocular  character  which  it  often  assumed,  the 
latter  by  its  ancient  choruses  of  satyrs.     Pratinas  may,  perhaps,  be  con 
sidered  to  have  shared  with  his  contemporary  Lasus  the  honor  of  found 
ing  the  Athenian  school  of  dithyrambic  poetry.     The  fragments  of  Prati 
nas  are  contained  in  Wagner's  Tragic.  Grccc.  Fragm.  (in  Didot's  Biblio- 
theca). 

IV.  JESCHYLUS  (AtVxuAos)4  was  born  at  Eleusis,  in  Attica,  B.C.  525,  so 
that  he  was  thirty-five  years  of  age  at  the  time  of  the  battle  of  Marathon, 
and  contemporary  with  Simonides  and  Pindar.     His  father  Euphorion 
was  probably  connected  with  the  worship  of  Ceres,  and  ^Eschylus  him 
self  was,  according  to  some  authorities,  initiated  in  the  mysteries  of  that 
goddess.     At  the  age  of  25  (B.C.  499)  he  made  his  first  appearance  as  a 
competitor  for  the  prize  of  tragedy  against  Chcerilus  and  Pratinas,  with 
out,  however,  being  successful.     Afterward,  with  his  brothers  Cynaegirus 
and  Aminias,  he  fought  at  the  battle  of  Marathon  (B.C.  490),  and  also  at 
those  of  Salamis  (B.C.  480)  and  Plataeae  (B.C.  479).     In  B.C.  484,  sixteen 
years  subsequent  to  his  first  defeat  in  the  tragic  contest,  ^Eschylus  gained 
his  first  dramatic  victory.     The  titles  of  the  pieces  which  he  brought  out 
on  this  occasion  are  not  knowrn,  but  his  competitors  were  most  probably 
Pratinas  and  Phrynichus,  or  Chcerilus.     Afterward,  in  B.C.  472,  he  gain 
ed  the  prize  with  the  Persae,  the  earliest  of  his  extant  dramas.     In  B.C. 
468,  a  remarkable  event  occurred  in  the  poet's  life  :  he  was  defeated  in 
a  tragic  contest  by  his  younger  rival  Sophocles,  and,  if  we  may  believe 
Plutarch,5  his  mortification  at  this  indignity,  as  he  conceived  it,  was  so 
great,  that  he  quitted  Athens  in  disgust  the  very  same  year,,  and  went 
to  the  court  of  Hiero  at  Syracuse,  where  he  found  Simonides  the  lyric 
poet.     Of  the  fact  of  his  having  visited  Syracuse  at  the  time  alluded  to 
there  can  be  no  doubt ;  but  whether  the  motive  alleged  by  Plutarch  for 
his  doing  so  was  the  only  one,  or  a  real  one,  is  a  question  of  considera 
ble  difficulty,  though  of  little  practical  moment.     It  has  been  conjectured 
by  some  that  the  charge  of  cure/Seto,  or  impiety,  brought  against  JEschylus 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.         2  Id.t  9.  v.         3  Suid.,  s.  v.  irpSfros  eypcu/>c  npomVas. 
*  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Plut.,  dm.,  8. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  177 

for  an  alleged  divulging  of  the  mysteries  of  Ceres,1  but  possibly  from  po 
litical  motives,  was  in  some  way  connected  with  his  retirement  on  this 
occasion  from  his  native  country,  but  this  charge  belongs  rather  to  a  sub 
sequent  period  of  his  life. 

Shortly  before  the  arrival  of  ^Eschylus  at  the  court  of  Hiero,  that  prince 
had  built  the  town  of  .Etna,  at  the  bottom  of  the  mountain  of  that  name, 
and  on  the  site  of  the  ancient  Catana.  In  connection  with  this  event, 
^Eschylus  is  said  to  have  composed  his  play  of  the  "  Women  of  ^Etna," 
in  which  he  predicted  and  prayed  for  the  prosperity  of  the  new  city.  At 
the  request  of  Hiero,  he  also  reproduced  the  play  of  the  "  Persae,"  with 
which  he  had  been  victorious  in  the  dramatic  contests  at  Athens  (B. 
C.  472).  Now  we  know  that  the  trilogy  of  the  "  Seven  against  Thebes" 
was  represented  soon  after  the  "  Persee,"  and  hence  it  follows  that  the 
former  must  have  been  first  represented  not  later  than  B.C.  470. a  Be 
sides  the  "  Women  of  .'Etna,"  -<Eschylus  also  composed  other  pieces  in 
SJcily,  in  which  are  said  to  have  occurred  Sicilian  words  and  expressions 
not  intelligible  to  the  Athenians.3  From  the  number  of  such  words  and 
expressions  which  have  been  noticed  in  the  later  extant  plays  of  ^Es- 
chylus,  it  has  been  inferred  that  he  spent  a  considerable  time  in  Sicily 
on  this  his  first  visit.  It  may  be  remarked  here,  that,  according  to  some 
accounts,  ^Eschylus  had  even  visited  Sicily  before  this,  about  B.C.  488,  in 
consequence  of  the  victory  gained  over  him  by  Simonides,  to  whom  the 
Athenians  had  adjudged  the  prize  for  the  best  elegy  on  those  who  had  fall 
en  at  Marathon.  The  truth  of  this  statement,  however,  has  been  greatly 
questioned.4 

In  B.C.  467,  his  friend  and  patron  Hiero  died  ;  and  in  B.C.  458  it  ap 
pears  that  JEschylus  was  again  at  Athens,  from  the  fact  that  the  trilogy 
of  the  Orestea  was  produced  in  that  year.  In  the  same  or  the  following 
year  (B.C.  457),  ^Eschylus  again  visited  Sicily  for  the  last  time,  and  the 
reason  assigned  for  this  his  second  visit  to  that  island  is  both  probable 
and  sufficient.  He  was  accused  of  impiety  before  the  court  of  the  Are 
opagus,  and  would  have  been  condemned  but  for  the  interposition  of  his 
brother  Aminias,  who  had  distinguished  himself  at  the  battle  of  Salamis.5 
What  the  specific  nature  of  the  charge  was  is  not  known  ;  but  it  is  sup 
posed  to  have  been  founded  on  his  having  either  divulged  or  spoken  pro 
fanely  in  some  of  his  plays  concerning  the  mysteries  of  Ceres.  At  any 
rate,  from  the  number  of  authorities  all  confirming  this  conclusion,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  toward  the  end  of  his  life  ^Eschylus  incurred  the  se 
rious  displeasure  of  a  strong  party  at  Athens,  and  that  after  the  exhibi 
tion  of  the  Orestean  trilogy  he  retired  to  Gela  in  Sicily,  where  he  died, 
B.C.  456,  in  the  69th  year  of  his  age,  and  three  years  after  the  representa 
tion  of  the  Eumenides,  on  which  play,  according  to  some,  the  charge  of 
impiety  was  founded.  On  the  manner  of  his  death  the  ancient  \vriters 
are  unanimous.6  An  eagle,  say  they,  mistaking  the  poet's  bald  head  for 
a  stone,  let  a  tortoise  fall  upon  it  to  break  the  shell,  and  so  fulfilled  an 

1  Aristot.,  Eth.,  iii.,  1.  »  Welcker,  TYilOgie,  p.  520 ;  Schol.  ad  Aristoph.,  Ran.,  1053. 

3  AthencBus,  ix.,  p.  402,  b.  *  Bode,  Gesch.  d.  Dichtk.,  iii.,  p.  215. 

6  JEtian,  V.  H.,  v,,  19.  «  Sttid,,  s,  u. 


178  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

oracle,  according  to  which  JSschylus  was  fated  to  die  by  a  blow  from 
heaven. 

The  inhabitants  of  Gela  showed  their  regard  for  his  character,  by  pub 
lic  solemnities  in  his  honor,  by  erecting  a  noble  monument  to  him,  and 
inscribing  it  with  an  epitaph  written  by  himself,1  in  which,  strangely 
enough,  he  describes  the  field  of  Marathon  as  the  scene  of  his  glory,  with 
out  any  allusion  whatever  to  his  success  as  a  dramatist.  In  Sicily  the 
memory  of  ^Eschylus  was  long  held  in  the  highest  veneration  ;  and  in 
Attica,  although  he  had  parted  from  its  shores  with  bitter  feelings,  the 
next  generation  appears  to  have  prized  the  works  of  JEschylus  very  high 
ly,  for  what  we  read  about  him  in  the  "  Frogs"  of  Aristophanes  must  be 
regarded  as  the  judgment  of  the  ablest  Athenian  critics  at  the  time.  Not 
only  were  the  dramas  which  had  been  performed  in  his  lifetime  repeated 
after  his  death,  and  treated  like  new  compositions,  so  as  to  be  allowed  to 
come  into  competition  with  new  dramas,  the  state,  by  a  special  decree  of 
the  people,  providing  a  chorus  at  the  public  expense,  for  any  one  who. 
might  wish  to  exhibit  his  tragedies  a  second  time,2  but  pieces  which  had 
not  been  brought  out  by  the  poet  himself  were  produced  upon  the  stage 
by  his  son  Euphorion,  and  gained  prizes.  In  this  way  Euphorion  was 
victorious  with  a  tetralogy  in  B.C.  431,  over  Sophocles  and  Euripides. 
Philocles,  also,  the  son  of  a  sister  of  JEschylus,  was  victorious  over  the 
King  GEdipus  of  Sophocles,  probably  with  a  tragedy  of  his  uncle's.  From 
and  by  means  of  these  persons  arose  what  was  called  the  Tragic  school 
of  JEschylus,  which  continued  for  the  space  of  125  years.3 

TJiejstyle  of  ,;i;.srhylus  is  bold,  energetic,  and  sublime,  lull  of  gorgeous 
imagery  and  magnificent  expressions,  sucTTas  became^he""eTevatearchar- 
acters  of  his  dramas,  and  the  ideas  he  wished  to  express.4  'TiVflTe  turn 
of  his  expressions  the  poetical  predominates  over  the  syntactical.  He 
was  peculiarly  fond  of  metaphorical  phrases  and  strange  compounds,  and 
of  obsolete  language,  so  that  he  was  much  more  epic  in  his  manner  of  ex 
pression  than  either  Sophocles  or  Euripides,  and  he  excelled  in  displaying 
strong  feelings  and  impulses,  and  in  describing  the  awful  and  the  terrible, 
rather  than  in  exhibiting  the  workings  of  the  human  mind  under  the  in 
fluence  of  complicated  and  various  emotions.  But,  notwithstanding  the 
general  elevation  of  his  style,  the  subordinate  characters  in  his  plays,  as 
the  watchman  in  the  Agamemnon,  and  the  nurse  of  Orestes  in  the  Choe- 
phorae,  are  made  to  use  language  fitting  their  station,  and  less  removed 
from  that  of  ordinary  life.  The  characters  of  JEschylus,  like  his  diction, 
are  sublime  and  majestic  ;  they  were  gods  and  powers  of  colossal  mag 
nitude,  whose  imposing  aspect  could  be  endured  by  the  heroes  of  Mara 
thon  and  Salamis,  but  was  too  awful  for  the  contemplation  of  a  later  age, 
who  complained  that  ^Eschylus's  language  was  not  human.  Hence  the 
general  impression  produced  by  the  poetry  of  ^Eschylus  was  rather  of  a 
religious  than  a  moral  nature ;  his  personages  being  both  in  action  and 
suffering  superhuman,  and  therefore  not  always  fitted  to  teach  practical 
lessons.5 

1  Paus.,  i.,  14,  4;  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  627,  D.  a  Aristoph.,  Acharn..,  102,  JEschijl.  Vit. 

3  Hermann.,  Opusc.,  ii.,  p.  158.        *  Aristopk.,  Ran.,  934.        6  Smitk,  Diet.  Biagr.,  «.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  179 

The  Greeks  justly  regarded  ^Eschylus  as  the  father  of  tragedy.  Be 
fore  his  time  the  art  scarcely  deserved  the  name  of  drama,  and  the  prog 
ress  which  it  made  under  the  direction  of  his  genius  was  far  greater  than 
any  which  it  owed  to  his  successors.  It  required  much  more  power  to 
raise  the  drama  from  the  state  in  which  it  was  in  the  hands  of  the  poets 
previous  to  ^Eschylus,  to  the  condition  in  which  we  find  it  in  his  works, 
than  merely  to  continue  what  he  had  commenced.  Before  the  time  of 
^Eschylus,  as  we  have  before  remarked,  only  one  actor  appeared  on  the 
stage  at  once,  who  carried  on  the  dialogue  writh  the  chorus,  or  told  his 
story  to  them.  vEschylus  introduced  a  second  actor,  which  was  the  first 
step  toward  making  the  dialogue  and  the  action  independent  of  the  cho 
rus.  The  dialogue  now  became  more  free  and  animated,  and  the  contrast 
between  a  principal  (protagonistes)  and  a  secondary  character  (deutcrago- 
nistes)  enabled  the  poet  to  interest  his  audience  in  the  action,  which  before 
his  time  was  of  secondary  importance,  the  chorus  being  then  the  princi 
pal  part  of  the  drama.  But  still  the  action  in  the  dramas  of  JEschylus  is 
yet  not  altogether  independent  of  the  chorus,  which  takes  a  considerable 
part  in  the  events  of  the  piece.  The  complete  separation  of  these  two 
elements  was  reserved  for  Sophocles.1 

An  innovation  like  the  above  was  undoubtedly  adopted  by  the  contem 
poraries  of  ^Eschylus,  just  as  he  himself,  at  a  later  period,  adopted  that  of 
Sophocles,  by  which  a  third  actor  was  introduced.  There  are,  it  is  true, 
dramas  of  ^Eschylus  in  which  three  persons  appear  on  the  stage  at  once ; 
but  in  this  case  the  dialogue  is  carried  on  by  only  two  of  them.  A  third 
actor  who  takes  part  in  the  dialogue  does  not  occur  in  any  drama  written 
before  the  year  B.C.  468,  when  Sophocles  showed  the  advantage  of  a 
third  actor.  The  part  of  the  protagonistes  was  in  most  cases  performed 
by  ^Eschylus  himself,  and  the  names  of  twyo  celebrated  actors  are  known 
who  were  trained  and  instructed  by  the  poet,  and  probably  acted  the  parts 
of  deuteragonistae.  They  were  Clearchus  and  Myniscus  of  Chalcis.  Be 
fore  the  time  of  ^Eschylus,  the  poets  generally  acted  their  own  dramas, 
and  were  obliged  to  perform  the  parts  of  the  several  characters  of  a  piece, 
one  by  one,  in  succession.  This  inconvenience  was  obviated,  in  some 
degree,  by  the  introduction  of  a  second  actor,  though  the  same  actor  was 
still  obliged  to  perform  several  parts.  There  are,  however,  several  points 
in  the  dialogue  of  the  JEschylean  drama  which  remind  us  of  what  the  art 
was  before  his  time.  The  dialogue  is  sometimes  carried  on  between  the 
actor  and  the  chorus,  and  in  this,  as  well  as  in  other  cases,  it  proceeds 
with  great  regularity.,  which  to  a  modern  critic  would  appear  stifF  and 
unnatural :  the  verses  are  mostly  distributed  in  certain  proportions  be 
tween  the  speakers,  and  the  protagonistes,  in  most  cases,  uses  more 
verses  than  the  deuteragonistes.  This  is,  indeed,  a  peculiarity  of  all 
Greek  tragedies,  but  in  JEschylus  it  is  more  striking  than  in  any  of  his 
successors.2 

^Eschylus  also  introduced  great  improvements  in  the  choral  dance. 
He  invented  several  dances  himself,  instructed  the  dancers  without  the 
assistance  of  a  teacher,  and  paid  the  most  anxious  attention  to  the  or- 

i  Biograph.  Diet,  of  Soc.for  Diff.  of  Useful  Knowledge,  vol.  i.,  p.  408.  »  Ibid. 


180  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

chestral  performances  of  the  chorus.  He  was  also  the  first  who  saw  the 
propriety  of  adapting  the  dress  of  the  actors  and  the  scenery  to  the  char 
acters  which  they  represented.  He  introduced  the  cothurnus,  or  high- 
soled  buskin,  and  the  other  artificial  means  already  mentioned,  to  raise 
the  figure  of  the  actors  above  the  standard  of  ordinary  men  ;  the  masks 
were  greatly  improved  by  him,  and  he  bestowed  the  utmost  care'  and  at 
tention  upon  the  whole  of  the  theatrical  wardrobe.  The  introduction  of 
scene-painting  is  likewise  ascribed  to  ^Eschylus.  The  machinery  requi 
site  for  theatrical  performances  must  have  attained  a  high  degree  of  per 
fection  under  him,  on  account  of  his  frequent  introduction  of  the  gods 
and  other  supernatural  beings  upon  the  stage.  Every  thing,  in  fine,  of 
importance  to  the  performance  of  the  drama  was  thus  either  perfected 
or  introduced  by  ./Eschylus,  who  left  to  those  who  succeeded  him  noth 
ing  but  to  complete  the  work  which  he  had  commenced. 

It  is  stated  that  ^Eschylus  wrote  seventy  tragedies  and  several  satyric 
dramas.  Five  were  ascribed  to  him  on  doubtful  authority.  All  these 
productions  were  written  within  forty-four  years,  from  500  to  456  B.C. 
Of  their  general  excellence  we  may  judge  from  the  fact  that  he  gained 
the  prize  of  tragedy  thirteen  times.  It  is  a  very  questionable  point 
whether  the  tragedies  of  ^Eschylus  were  always  so  arranged  as  to  form 
trilogies,  that  is,  great  dramatic  compositions  consisting  of  three  distinct 
tragedies,  each  of  which  was  in  some  degree  entire  in  itself,  and  yet 
formed,  as  it  were,  only  one  of  the  three  acts  of  a  greater  drama,  and 
could  not  be  properly  understood  unless  viewed  in  its  connection  with 
the  others.  Welcker,  by  a  careful  examination  of  the  extant  plays,  and 
of  the  fragments  and  titles  of  those  which  are  lost,  has  endeavored  to 
show  that  all  the  works  of  ^Eschylus  were  such  trilogies;  but  although 
it  is  beyond  doubt  that  many  were  intended  to  form  trilogies,  there  is  not 
sufficient  evidence  to  show  this  of  all ;  and  as  regards  the  "  Persae,"  it  is 
perfectly  certain  that  it  was  not  part  of  a  trilogy.  The  few  fragments 
of  many  of  the  lost  pieces,  moreover,  scarcely  enable  us  to  form  an  ac 
curate  idea  of  their  contents.  The  only  specimen  of  a  trilogy  which  is 
preserved  entire  is  the  "  Orestea,"  consisting  of  the  "  Agamemnon,"  the 
"  Choephorae,"  and  the  "Eumenides."  The  three  otlier  pieces  which 
we  possess  entire,  namely,  the  "  Seven  against  Thebes,"  the  "  Suppli 
ants,"  and  the  "  Prometheus,"  are  undoubtedly  likewise  parts  of  trilogies. 
The  earliest  among  the  seven  extant  plays  is  the  "  Persae,"  which  was 
first  acted  at  Athens  in  B.C.  472,  and  forms  an  exception  to  the  other 
plays  of  JEschylus,  inasmuch  as  the  subject  is  taken  from  the  history  of 
the  poet's  own  time.  A  year  after  the  "  Persae,"  the  "  Seven  against 
Thebes"  was  brought  out.  The  latest  is  the  Orestean  trilogy,  which,  as 
already  stated,  was  brought  upon  the  stage  in  B.C.  458.  The  "Suppli 
ants"  and  the  "  Prometheus"  came  in  the  period  between  this  year  and 
that  in  which  the  "  Persians"  was  brought  out,  but  the  exact  time  is  not 
known.  From  allusions,  however,  in  the  "  Suppliants,"  it  has  been  in 
ferred,  with  some  probability,  that  it  was  written  about  B.C.  461,  during 
the  time  that  Athens  was  allied  with  Argos.1 

i  Bicgrapk.  Diet,  of  Sac.  for  Diff.  of  Useful  Knowledge,  vol.  i.,  p.  409. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  181 

The  performance  of  each  trilogy  of  JEschylus  was  followed  by  that  of 
a  satyric  drama,  which,  together  with  the  three  tragedies,  formed  a  te 
tralogy,  and  the  subject  of  which  was  in  some  cases  connected  with  that 
of  the  trilogy.  The  name  of  the  satyric  drama  connected  with  the 
"  Orestea"  was  the  "  Proteus."  We  know  the  names  of  eight  others  of 
these  burlesque  dramas  of  ^Eschylus,  but  none  are  preserved.  The  an 
cients  state  that  ^Eschylus  was  as  great  a  master  in  the  satyric  drama 
as  in  tragedy.  As  regards  the  artistic  character  of  the  tragedies  of  JEs- 
chylus,  to  which  we  have  already  in  part  alluded,  we  have  few  observa 
tions  of  the  ancients  themselves.  Sophocles,  who  is  reported  to  have 
said  that  ^Eschylus  always  composed  his  poems  as  he  ought,  without  be 
ing  conscious  of  it,  has  expressed  in  the  best  manner  the  fact  that  ^Es- 
chylus  was  a  great  poet.  All  that  Sophocles,  Aristophanes,  and  other 
ancient  writers  object  to  in  .zEschylus  refers  merely  to  form,  and  not  to 
the  artistic  plan  and  structure  of  his  work  ;  it  is  only  the  pompous  grand 
iloquence  and  the  boldness  of  his  imagery  which  they  find  fault  with. 
These  are,  indeed,  very  striking  features  in  the  dramas  of  ^Eschylus,  but 
he  himself  seems  not  only  to  have  been  aware  of  it,  but  to  have  thought 
it  necessary  that  his  gods  and  heroes,  being  so  far  above  the  human 
standard,  should  also  speak  a  language  above  that  of  ordinary  mortals. 

Although  the  Greeks  at  all  times  had  great  reverence  for  the  father  of 
their  tragedy,  yet  the  further  they  \vere  removed  from  his  age,  the  less 
were  they  able  to  appreciate  him.  In  fact,  the  most  extraordinary  power 
of  his  master  genius,  the  artistic  construction  of  a  trilogy,  is  scarcely  no 
ticed  by  them,  and  its  discovery  and  right  appreciation  belong  altogether 
to  modern  times,  and  more  especially  to  Welcker,  whose  researches  on 
this  point  have  been  followed  up  by  Droysen,  Gruppe,  and  others.  Soon 
'  after  the  death  of  ^Eschylus,  the  Greeks  began  to  perform  his  single  plays 
separately,  and  thus  gradually  forgot  that  they  were  only  acts  of  greater 
dramas.  The  plan  of  a  tragedy  of  JEschylus  is  always  extremely  simple, 
and  without  any  complicated  plot ;  the  action  proceeds  smoothly,  but  rap 
idly,  and  the  poet  does  not  anxiously  concern  himself  to  lay  open  to  his 
audience  every  link  by  which  the  parts  of  the  action  are  connected  ;  he 
draws  his  pictures  only  in  bold  outline,  which  he  leaves  to  the  imagina 
tion  of  his  hearers  to  fill  up.  But  it  is  this  very  simplicity  of  his  design 
which  constitutes  his  grandeur  and  sublimity. 

One  leading  idea  of  the  dramas  of  vEschylus  is  a  struggle  between  the 
free  will  of  man  and  the  power  of  destiny,  to  which  the  gods  themselves 
must  submit,  and  to  which  man  must  fall  a  victim  if  he  presumes  to  op 
pose  it.  Such  an  idea  is  both  religious  and  ethical,  and  intended  to  im 
press  upon  man  the  necessity  of  submitting  to  higher  powers,  and  of  hum 
bly  recognizing  his  own  weakness.  Another  leading  idea  which  appears 
in  some  of  his  plays  is,  that  crime,  by  a  moral  necessity,  leads  to  farther 
crime,  and  so  to  calamity,  which  is  its  punishment,  or,  as  Droysen  has 
expressed  it,  that  "  whoever  acts  must  suffer."  ^Eschylus  represents  to 
us  the  piety  of  the  age  to  whieh  he  belonged,  an  age  which  could  not  con 
ceive  that  its  own  great  works  were  accomplished  without  the  aid  of  the 
gods.  He  himself  was,  as  we  have  said,  initiated  in  the  Eleusinian  mys- 


182  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

teries,  and  well  acquainted  with  the  philosophical  inquiries  which  then 
began  to  be  carried  on  in  Greece  ;  and  these  circumstances  undoubtedly 
contributed  to  the  earnestness  with  which  he  looked  upon  man,  and  his 
relation  to  higher  powers.1 

EDITIONS    OF    AESCHYLUS.2 

The  tragedies  of  ^Eschylus  which  have  come  down  to  us  have,  with  the  exception  of 
the  "  Prometheus,"  suffered  more  from  the  carelessness  of  transcribers  than  many  other 
remains  of  ancient  literature.  The  first  edition  was  printed  at  Venice,  1518,  8vo,  by 
Aldus  ;  but  considerable  parts  of  the  "  Agamemnon"  and  of  the  "  Choephoraj"  are  not 
contained  in  this  edition  ;  and,  what  is  still  more  surprising,  the  printed  part  of  the  Ag 
amemnon  is  attached  to  the  ChoSphorae,  and  both  are  made  up  into  one  play  ;  so  that  thus 
this  edition  contains  six  plays  merely.  Robortellus,  in  his  edition,  Venice,  1552,  8vo, 
corrected  the  error,  and  separated  the  Agamemnon  from  the  Choephorae  ;  and  in  the  same 
year  he  also  published  the  Greek  scholia,  and  the  Greek  "Life  of  ^Eschylus,"  in  2  vols. 
8vo.  The  first  complete  edition  of  the  seven  tragedies  is  that  by  H.  Stephens,  Paris, 
1557,  4to.  One  of  the  best  among  the  subsequent  editions  is  that  of  Stanley,  London, 
1663,  fol.,  which  contains  the  scholia,  a  commentary,  and  a  Latin  translation.  This  was 
reprinted  with  some  additions  by  De  Pauw,  Haag,  1745,  2  vols.  4to,  and  again  by  But 
ler,  Cambridge,  1809-1816,  with  additions  from  Stanley's  unpublished  notes,  8  vols.  8vo, 
and  4  vols.  4to.  The  edition  of  Schiitz,  in  5  vols.  8vo,  though  of  very  little  value,  has 
gone  through  three  imprints  (1782-1809).  The  first  three  volumes  contain  the  text  and 
commentary,  the  other  two  the  fragments  of  the  lost  plays  and  the  Greek  scholia.  The 
best  recent  editions  are  those  of  Wellauer,  Lips.,  1823-1830,  3  vols.  8vo,  the  text  and 
notes  in  two  volumes,  and  the  Lexicon  ^Eschyleum  in  one  ;  of  W.  Dindorf,  in  the  Poetas 
Scenici  Greed,  reprinted  at  Oxford,  1832-1841,  in  3  vols.  8vo,  the  last  volume  in  two 
parts ;  of  Scholefield,  Cambridge,  1828,  8vo,  reprinted  in  1851 ;  of  Ahrens,  in  Didot's 
Bibliotlieca,  Paris,  1842 ;  and  of  Hermann,  Leipzig,  1852,  2  vols.  8vo.  A  new  edition 
was  commenced,  also,  by  Klausen,  Gotha,  1833,  8vo,  but  was  interrupted  by  his  death. 
Only  the  Agamemnon  and  Choephora?  were  published.  The  editions  of  single  plays, 
and  dissertations  upon  them,  or  passages  of  them,  are  almost  innumerable.  The  separ 
ate  plays,  except  the  "  Suppliants"  and  the  "  Eumenides,"  have  been  ably  edited  in  En 
gland  by  Blomfield.  Of  the  separate  editions  of  these  plays  in  Germany,  one  of  the  most 
valuable  is  that  of  the  "  Eumenides,"  by  K.  O.  Miiller.  There  is  also  an  excellent  edi 
tion  of  the  "Orestea,"  by  Franz,  Leipzig,  1846,  8vo.  Welcker's  works  in  relation  to 
./Eschylus,  and  Greek  tragedy  in  general,  are  also  exceedingly  valuable.  Their  titles 
are :  Die  JEschylischt  Trilogie  Prometheus,  Darmstadt,  1824,  8vo ;  Nachtrag  zur  Trilogie, 
Frankfort,  1826 ;  and  Die  Griechischen  Tragoedien,  Bonn,  1840,  8vo.  The  Lexicon  to 
jEschylus,  by  Linwood,  Lond.,  1843,  reprinted  Lond.,  1847,  will  be  found  a  very  useful 
auxiliary  to  the  student. 

1  Biograph.  Diet,  of  Soc.  for  Diff.  of  Useful  Knowledge,  vol.  i.,  p.  408. 

2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  183 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD—  continued. 

GREEK     TRAGEDIAN  S  -  Continued. 

I.  SOPHOCLES  (Scx/Jo/cArjy)1  was  born  at  Colonus,  a  demus  of  Attica,  about 


a  mile  from  the  city  of  Athens,  toward  the  northwest,  five  years  before 
the  battle  of  Marathon,  B.C.  495.  a  He  was  thirty  years  younger,  there 
fore,  than  -.-Eschylus,  and  fifteen  years  older  than  Euripides.  His  father's 
name  was  Sophilus  or  Sophillus,  of.  whose  condition  in  life  we  know  noth 
ing  for  certain  ;  but  it  is  clear  that  Sophocles  received  an  education  not 
inferior  to  that  of  the  most  distinguished  citizens  of  Athens.  To  both  of 
the  two  leading  branches  of  Greek  education,  music  and  gymnastics,  he 
was  carefully  trained,  and  in  both  he  gained  the  prize  of  a  garland.  Of 
the  skill  which  he  had  attained  to  in  music  and  dancing  in  his  sixteenth 
year,  and  of  the  perfection  of  his  bodily  form,  we  have  conclusive  evidence 
in  the  fact  that,  when  the  Athenians  were  assembled  in  solemn  festival 
around  the  trophy  which  they  had  set  up  in  Salamis  to  celebrate  their  vic 
tory  over  the  fleet  of  Xerxes,  Sophocles  was  chosen  to  lead,  naked  and 
with  lyre  in  hand,  the  chorus  which  danced  around  the  trophy,  and  sang 
the  songs  of  triumph,  B.C.  480.  3  The  statement  of  the  anonymous  biog 
rapher  of  Sophocles,  that  he  learned  tragedy  from  ^Eschylus,  has  been 
objected  to  on  grounds  that  are  perfectly  conclusive,  if  it  be  understood 
as  meaning  any  direct  and  formal  instruction  ;  but,  from  the  connection 
in  which  the  words  stand,  they  appear  to  express  nothing  more  than  the 
simple  and  obvious  fact,  that  Sophocles,  having  received  the  art  in  the 
form  to  which  it  had  been  advanced  by  ^Eschylus,  made  in  it  other  im 
provements  of  his  own. 

His  first  appearance  as  a  dramatist  took  place  in  B.C.  468,  under  pecul 
iarly  interesting  circumstances  ;  not  only  from  the  fact  that  Sophocles, 
at  the  age  of  twenty-seven,  came  forward  as  the  rival  of  the  veteran  JEs- 
chylus,  whose  supremacy  had  been  maintained  during  an  entire  genera 
tion,  but  also  from  the  character  of  the  judges.  The  solemnities  of  the 
greater  Dionysia  were  rendered  more  imposing  by  the  occasion  of  the  re 
turn  of  Cirnon  from  his  expedition  to  Scyros,  bringing  with  him  the  bones 
of  Theseus.  Public  expectation  was  so  excited  respecting  the  approach 
ing  dramatic  contest,  and  party  feeling  ran  so  high,  that  Apsephion,  the 
archon  eponymus,  whose  duty  it  was  to  appoint  the  judges,  had  not  yet 
ventured  to  proceed  to  the  final  act  of  drawing  the  lots  for  their  election, 
when  Cimon,  with  his  nine  colleagues  in  the  command,  having  entered 
the  theatre,  the  archon  detained  them  at  the  altar,  and  administered  to 
them  the  oath  appointed  for  the  judges  in  the  dramatic  contests.  Their 
decision  was  in  favor  of  Sophocles,  who  received  the  first  prize,  the  sec- 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  ;  Donaldson,  Theatre  of  the  Greeks,  p.  81,  seqq.,  6th  ed.  ; 
Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  337,  seqq.  2  Clinton,  Miiller,  and  others  prefer  B.C.  496. 

3  AOuH.,i.tV.  20;  Vit.  Anon. 


184  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ond  only  being  a\varded  to  ^Eschylus,  who  was  so  mortified  at  his  defeat 
thai,  according  to  the  common  account,  he  left  Athens  in  consequence, 
and  retired  to  Sicily.1  From  this  epoch  Sophocles  held  the  supremacy  of 
the  Athenian  stage,  until  a  formidable  rival  arose  in  Euripides,  who  gained 
the  first  prize  for  the  first  time  in  441.  The  drama  which  Sophocles  ex 
hibited  on  the  occasion  of  his  first  victory  is  supposed,  from  a  chronolog 
ical  computation  in  Pliny,2  to  have  been  the  Triptolemus,  respecting  the 
nature  of  which  there  has  been  much  disputation.  Welcker,  who  has 
discussed  the  question  very  fully,  supposes  that  the  main  subject  of  the 
drama  was  the  institution  of  the  Eleusinian  mysteries,  and  the  establish 
ment  of  the  worship  of  Ceres  at  Athens,  by  Triptolemus. 

The  year  440  B.C.  is  a  most  important  era  in  the  poet's  life.  In  the 
spring  of  that  year,  most  probably,  he  brought  out  the  earliest  and  one 
of  the  best  of  his  extant  dramas,  the  Antigone,  a  play  which  gave  the 
Athenians  so  much  satisfaction,  especially  on  account  of  the  political  wis 
dom  it  displayed,  that  they  appointed  him  one  of  the  ten  generals,  of  whom 
Pericles  was  the  chief,  in  the  war  against  the  aristocratic  faction  of  Sa- 
mos,  which  lasted  from  the  summer  of  B.C.  440  to  the  spring  of  B.C.  439. 
The  anonymous  biographer  states  that  this  expedition  took  place  seven 
years  before  the  Peloponnesian  war,  and  that  Sophocles  was  55  years  old 
at  the  time.  From  an  anecdote  preserved  by  Athenaeus,  from  the  Trav 
els  of  the  poet  Ion,  it  appears  that  Sophocles  was  engaged  in  bringing  up 
the  re-enforcements  from  Chios,  and  that,  amid  the  occupations  of  his 
military  command,  he  preserved  his  wonted  tranquillity  of  mind,  and  found 
leisure  to  gratify  his  voluptuous  tastes,  and  to  delight  his  comrades  with 
his  calm  and  pleasant  conversation  at  their  banquets.  From  the  same 
narrative  it  would  seem  that  Sophocles  neither  obtained  nor  sought  for 
any  military  reputation  ;  he  is  represented  as  good-humoredly  repeating 
the  judgment  of  Pericles  concerning  him,  that  he  understood  the  making 
of  poetry,  but  not  the  commanding  of  an  army.3 

The  period  extending  from  the  56th  year  of  his  age  to  his  death  was 
that  of  his  greatest  poetical  activity,  and  to  it  belong,  with  the  exception 
of  the  Antigone,  all  his  extant  dramas.  Respecting  his  personal  history, 
however,  during  this  period  of  thirty-four  years,  we  have  scarcely  any  de 
tails.  The  excitement  of  the  Peloponnesian  war  seems  to  have  had  no 
other  influence  upon  him  than  to  stimulate  his  literary  efforts  by  the  new 
impulse  which  it  gave  to  the  intellectual  activity  of  the  age ;  until  that 
disastrous  period  after  the  Sicilian  expedition,  when  the  reaction  of  un 
successful  war  led  to  anarchy  at  home.  Then  wre  find  him,  like  others 
of  the  chief  literary  men  of  Athens,  joining  in  the  desperate  attempt  to 
stay  the  ruin  of  their  country,  by  means  of  an  aristocratic  revolution  ; 
although,  according  to  the  accounts  which  have  come  down  to  us  of  the 
part  which  Sophocles  took  in  this  movement,  he  only  assented  to  it  as  a 
measure  of  public  safety,  and  not  from  any  love  of  oligarchy.  As  he  was 
then  in  his  83d  year,  however,  it  is  not  likely  that  he  took  an  active  part 
in  public  affairs.  One  thing,  at  least,  is  clear  as  to  his  political  principles, 

i  Pint,  dm.,  8 ;  Harm.  Par.,  57.  a  H.  N.,  xviii.,  7,  12. 

3  Ash.,  xiii.,  p.  603,  seq.;  Vit.  Anon. ;  Plut^  Per.,  8. 


ATTIC     PERIOD. 


185 


that  he  was  an  ardent  lover  of  his  country.  The  patriotic  sentiments 
which  we  still  admire  in  his  poems  were  illustrated  by  his  own  conduct ; 
for,  unlike  Simonides  and  Pindar,  ^Eschylus,  Euripides,  and  Plato,  and 
others  of  the  greatest  poets  and  philosophers  of  Greece,  Sophocles  would 
never  condescend  to  accept  the  patronage  of  monarchs,  or  to  leave  his 
country  in  compliance  with  their  repeated  invitations. 

The  family  dissensions  which  troubled  his  last  years  are  connected 
with  a  well-known  and  beautiful  story.  His  family  consisted  of  two  sons, 
lophon,  the  offspring  of  Nicostrate,  who  was  a  free  Athenian  woman, 
and  Ariston,  his  son  by  Theoris  of  Sicyon  ;  and  Ariston  had  a  son  named 
Sophocles,  for  whom  his  grandfather  showed  the  greatest  affection.  loph 
on,  who  was,  by  the  laws  of  Athens,  his  father's  rightful  heir,  jealous 
of  his  love  for  the  young  Sophocles,  and  apprehending  that  the  poet  pur 
posed  to  bestow  upon  his  grandson  a  large  proportion  of  his  property,  is 
said  to  have  summoned  his  father  before  the  Phratores,  who  seem  to  have 
had  a  sort  of  jurisdiction  in  family  affairs,  on  the  charge  that  his  mind 
was  affected  by  old  age.  As  his  only  reply,  Sophocles  exclaimed,  "  If  I 
am  Sophocles,  I  am  not  beside  myself;  and  if  I  am  beside  myself,  I  am 
not  Sophocles  ;"  and  then  he  read  from  his  "  GEdipus  at  Colonus,"  which 
had  been  only  lately  written,  and  was  not  yet  brought  out,  the  magnifi 
cent  parodus  beginning  Eviinrov,  £fvey  rasSe  x^Pas>  whereupon  the  judges 
at  once  dismissed  the  case,  and  rebuked  lophon  for  his  undutiful  conduct.1 
Sophocles  forgave  his  son,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  reconciliation  was 
referred  to  in  the  lines  of  the  "  (Edipus  at  Colonus,"  where  Antigone 
pleads  with  her  father  to  forgive  Polynices,  as  other  fathers  had  been  in 
duced  to  forgive  their  bad  children. 

Sophocles  died  soon  afterward,  in  B.C.  406,  in  his  ninetieth  year.  All 
the  various  accounts  of  his  death  and  funeral  are  of  a  fictitious  and  poet 
ical  complexion.  According  to  some  writers,  he  was  choked  by  a  grape  ; 
another  writer  related  that,  in  a  public  recitation  of  the  Antigcme,  he  sus 
tained  his  voice  so  long  without  a  pause  that,  through  the  weakness  of 
extreme  age,  he  lost  his  breath  and  his  life  together ;  while  others  as 
cribed  his  death  to  excessive  joy  at  obtaining  a  dramatic  victory. 

By  the  universal  consent  of  the  best  critics,  both  of  ancient  and  mod 
ern  times,  the  tragedies  of  Sophocles  are  not  only  the  perfection  of  the 
Greek  drama,  but  they  approach  as  nearly  as  is  conceivable  to  the  perfect 
ideal  model  of  that  species  of  poetry.  The  subjects  and  style  of  Sopho 
cles  are  human,  while  those  of  ^Eschylus  are  essentially  heroic.  The 
latter  excite  terror,  pity,  and  admiration,  as  we  view  them  at  a  distance ; 
the  former  bring  those  same  feelings  home  to  the  heart,  with  the  addi 
tion  of  sympathy  and  self-application.  No  individual  human  being  can 
imagine  himself  in  the  position  of  Prometheus,  or  derive  a  personal  warn 
ing  from  the  crimes  and  fate  of  Clytemnestra ;  but  every  one  can,  in 
feeling,  share  the  self-devotion  of  Antigone  in  giving  up  her  life  at  the 
call  of  fraternal  piety,  and  the  calmness  which  comes  over  the  spirit  of 
(Edipus  when  he  is  reconciled  to  the  gods.  In  ^Eschylus,  the  sufferers 
are  the  victims  of  an  inexorable  destiny ;  but  Sophocles  brings  more 
1  Plut.,  An  seni  sit  gerend.  Resp.,  3,  p.  775,  B. 


186  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

prominently  into  view  those  faults  of  their  own,  which  form  one  element 
of  the  destiny  of  which  they  are  the  victims,  and  is  more  intent  upon  in 
culcating,  as  the  lesson  taught  by  their  woes,  that  wise  calmness  and 
moderation,  in  desires  and  actions,  in  prosperity  and  adversity,  which 
the  Greek  poets  and  philosophers  celebrate  under  the  name  of  o-utypocr- 
wi).  On  the  other  hand,  he  never  descends  to  that  level  to  which  Eurip 
ides  brought  down  the  art,  the  exhibition  of  human  passion  and  suffering 
for  the  mere  purpose  of  exciting  emotion  in  the  spectators,  apart  from 
the  moral  end.  The  difference  between  the  two  poets  is  illustrated  by 
the  saying  of  Sophocles,  that  he  himself  represented  men  as  they  ought 
to  be,  but  Euripides  exhibited  them  as  they  are.1 

Of  the  dramatic  changes  introduced  by  Sophocles,  the  most  important 
was  the  addition  of  the  rpirayoaviffT^s^  or  third  actor,  by  which  three  per 
sons  were  allowed  to  appear  on  the  stage  at  once  and  take  part  in  the 
dialogue,  instead  of  only  two.  This  change  vastly  enlarged  the  scope 
of  the  dramatic  action,  and  appeared,  indeed,  to  accomplish  all  that  was 
necessary  to  the  variety  and  mobility  of  action  in  tragedy,  without  sac 
rificing  that  simplicity  and  clearness  which,  in  the  good  ages  of  antiquity, 
were  always  held  to  be  most  essential  qualities.  By  the  addition  of  this 
third  actor,  the  chief  person  of  the  drama  was  brought  under  two  con 
flicting  influences,  by  the  force  of  which  both  sides  of  his  character  are 
at  once  displayed  ;  as  in  the  scene  where  Antigone  has  to  contend  at  the 
same  time  with  the  weakness  of  Ismene  and  the  tyranny  of  Creon. 
Sophocles  also  introduced  some  very  important  modifications  in  the 
choral  parts  of  the  drama.  According  to  Suidas,  he  raised  the  number 
of  choreutse  from  twelve  to  fifteen.  At  the  same  time,  the  choral  odes, 
which  still  in  ./Eschylus  occupied  a  large  space  in  the  tragedy,  and  formed 
a  sort  of  lyric  exhibition  of  the  subject  interwoven  with  the  dramatic 
representation,  were  very  considerably  curtailed.  The  mode,  too,  in 
which  the  chorus  is  connected  with  the  general  subject  and  progress  of 
the  drama,  is  different  in  Sophocles.  In  the  dramas  of  JEschylus,  the 
chorus  is  a  deeply-interested  party,  often  taking  a  decided  and  even  ve 
hement  share  in  the  action,  and  generally  involved  in  the  catastrophe ;  but 
the  chorus  of  Sophocles  has  more  of  the  character  of  a  spectator,  mod 
erator,  and  judge,  comparatively  impartial,  but  sympathizing  generally 
with  the  chief  character  of  the  play,  while  it  explains  and  harmonizes, 
as  far  as  possible,  the  feelings  of  all  the  actors.  The  chorus  of  Sopho 
cles  is  cited  by  Aristotle  as  an  example  of  his  definition  of  the  part  to  be 
taken  by  the  chorus. 

By  these  changes,  Sophocles  made  the  tragedy  a  drama  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  word.  The  interest  and  progress  of  the  piece  centred  al 
most  entirely  in  the  actions  and  speeches  of  the  persons  on  the  stage. 
A  necessary  consequence  of  this  alteration,  combined  with  the  addition 
of  a  third  actor,  was  a  much  more  careful  elaboration  of  the  dialogue ; 
and  the  care  bestowed  upon  this  part  of  the  composition  is  one  of  the 
most  striking  features  of  the  art  of  Sophocles,  whether  we  regard  the 
energy  and  point  of  the  conversations  which  take  place  upon  the  stage, 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  187 

or  the  vivid  pictures  of  actions  occurring  elsewhere,  which  are  drawn  in 
the  speeches  of  the  messengers.  It  must  not,  however,  be  imagined  for 
a  moment  that,  in  bestowing  so  much  care  upon  the  dialogue,  and  con 
fining  the  choral  parts  within  their  proper  limits,  Sophocles  was  careless 
as  to  the  mode  in  which  he  executed  the  latter.  On  the  contrary,  he 
appears  as  if  determined  to  use  his  utmost  efforts  to  compensate  in  the 
beauty  of  his  odes  for  what  he  had  taken  away  from  their  length. 

Another  alteration  of  the  greatest  consequence,  which,  though  it  per 
haps  did  not  originate  with  Sophocles,  he  was  the  first  to  convert  into  a 
general  practice,  was  the  abandonment  of  the  trilogistic  form,  in  so  far 
at  least  as  the  continuity  of  subject  was  concerned.  In  obedience  to  the 
established  custom  at  the  Dionysiac  festivals,  Sophocles  appears  gener 
ally  to  have  brought  forward  three  tragedies  and  a  satyric  drama  togeth 
er;  but  the  subjects  of  these  four  plays  were  entirely  distinct,  and  each 
was  complete  in  itself.  Among  the  merely  mechanical  improvements 
introduced  by  Sophocles,  the  most  important  was  that  of  scene-painting, 
in  which  he  availed  himself  of  the  aid  of  the  Athenian  artist  Agathar- 
chus,  and  improved  upon  the  perspective  painting  which  the  same  artist 
had  previously  executed  for  ^schylus. 

The  number  of  plays  ascribed  to  Sophocles  was  130,  of  which,  however, 
according  to  Aristophanes  of  Byzantium,  seventeen  were  spurious.  He 
contended  not  only  with  JSschylus  and  Euripides,  but  also  with  Chcerilus, 
Aristias,  Agathon,  and  other  poets,  among  whom  was  his  own  son  lophon ; 
and  he  carried  off  the  first  prize  twenty  or  twenty-four  times,  frequent 
ly  the  second,  but  never  fell  to  the  third.1  It  is  remarkable,  as  proving 
his  growing  activity  and  success,  that  of  his  113  dramas  eighty-one  were 
brought  out  in  the  second  of  the  two  periods  into  which  his  career  is  di 
vided  by  the  exhibition  of  the  Antigone,  which  was  his  thirty-second 
play  ;2  and  also  that  all  his  extant  dramas,  which  of  course,  in  the  judg 
ment  of  the  grammarians,  were  his  best,  belong  to  the  latter  of  these 
two  periods.  By  comparing  the  number  of  his  plays  with  the  sixty-two 
years  over  which  his  career  extended,  and  also  the  number  belonging  to 
each  of  the  two  periods,  Miiller  obtains  the  result  that  he  at  first  brought 
out  a  tetralogy  every  three  or  four  years,  but  afterward  every  two  years, 
at  least ;  and  also  that  in  several  of  the  tetralogies  the  satyric  dramas 
must  have  been  lost,  or  never  existed,  and  that  among  those  113  plays 
there  could  only  have  been,  at  the  most,  twenty-three  satyric  dramas  to 
ninety  tragedies.  The  titles  and  fragments  of  the  lost  plays  of  Sophocles 
will  be  found  collected  in  the  chief  editions,  and  in  Welcker's  Griechischen 
Tragoedicn,  Bonn,  1840.  In  addition  to  his  tragedies,  Sophocles  is  said 
to  have  written  an  elegy,  paeans,  and  other  poems,  and  a  prose  work  on 
the  chorus  in  opposition  to  Thespis  and  Chcerilus. 

The  following  is  most  probably  the  chronological  order  in  which  the 
seven  extant  tragedies  of  Sophocles  were  brought  out :  1.  Antigone  ;  2. 
Electra;  3.  Trachiniae ;  4.  GEdipus  Tyrannus ;  5.  Ajax;  6.  Philoctetes; 
7.  CEdipus  at  Colonus.  The  last  of  these  was  brought  out  after  the  death 
of  the  poet  by  his  grandson,  as  has  already  been  stated. 

1  Vit.  Anon.;  Suid.j  s.  v.  2  Aristoph.  Byz.,  Argum.  ad  Antig. 


188  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ANCIENT     COMMENTATORS     ON     SOPHOCLES 

In  the  scholia,  the  commentators  are  quoted  by  the  general  title  of  oi 
or  oi  vTro/xi'Tjju.aTio-ajaevot.  Among  those  cited  by  name,  or  to  whom  commentaries  on 
Sophocles  are  ascribed  by  other  authorities,  are  Aristarchus,  Praxiphanes,  Didymus, 
Herodianus,  Horapollon,  Androtion,  and  Aristophanes  of  Byzantium.  The  question  of 
the  value  of  the  scholia  is  discussed  by  Wunder,  De  Schol.  in  Soph,  auctoritate,  1838,  4to, 
and  Wolff,  De  Sophoclis  Scholiorum  Laur.  Variis  Lectionibus,  Lips.,  1843,  Svo.1 

EDITIONS    OF    SOPHOCLES. 

The  Editio  Princeps  is  that  of  Aldus,  1502,  Svo,  and  there  were  numerous  other  editions 
printed  in  the  16th  century,  the  best  of  which  are  those  of  H.  Stephanus,  Paris,  1568,  4to, 
and  of  Canterus,  Antwerp,  1579,  12mo,  both  founded  on  the  text  of  Turnebus.  None  of 
the  subsequent  editions  deserve  any  particular  notice,  until  we  come  to  those  of  Brunck, 
in  4  vols.  Svo,  Strasburg,  1786-1789,  and  in  2  vols.  4to,  Strasburg,  1786  ;  both  editions 
containing  the  Greek  text  with  a  Latin  version,  and  also  the  scholia  and  indices.  The 
text  of  Brunck,  which  was  founded  on  that  of  Aldus,  has  formed  the  foundation  of  all  the 
subsequent  editions,  of  which  the  following  are  the  most  important :  that  of  Musgrave, 
with  scholia,  notes,  and  indices,  Oxford,  1800,  1801,  2  vols.  Svo,  reprinted  Oxford,  1809, 
1810,  3  vols.  8vo  ;  that  of  Erfurdt,  with  scholia,  notes,  and  indices,  Leipzig,  1802-1825, 
7  vols.  Svo,  completed  by  Heller  and  Doederlein  ;  that  of  Bothe,  who  re-edited  Brunck's 
edition,  but  with  many  rash  changes  in  the  text,  Leipzig,  1806,  2  vols.  Svo,  last  edition, 
1827,  1828 ;  that  of  Hermann,  who  completed  a  new  edition,  which  Erfurdt  commenced, 
but  only  lived  to  publish  the  first  two  volumes,  Leipzig,  1809-1825,  7  vols.  small  Svo ; 
Hermann's  entirely  new  revision  of  Brunck's  edition,  with  additional  notes,  &c.,  Leip 
zig,  1823-L825,  7  vois.  Svo  ;  the  edition  of  Schneider,  with  German  notes  and  a  Lexicon, 
Weimar,  1823-1830,  10  vols.  12mo ;  the  London  reprint  of  Brunck's  edition,  with  the 
notes  of  Burney  and  Schaefer,  1824,  3  vols.  Svo ;  the  edition  of  Elmsley,  with  the  notes 
of  Brunck  and  Schaefer,  Lexicon  Sophocleum,  &c.,  Oxford,  1826,  2  vols.  Svo,  reprinted 
Leipzig,  1827  ;  that  of  the  text  alone  by  Dindorf,  in  the  Poetas  Scenici  Gr&ri,  Leipzig, 
1830,  2d  ed.  1847,  reprinted  at  Oxford,  1832-1836,  with  the  scholia  and  a  volume  of  notes, 
3  vols.  Svo ;  that  of  Benloew  and  Ahrens,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca,  Paris,  1842  :  that  of 
Mitchell,  Lond.,  1841-2,  2  vols.  Svo ;  and  lastly,  by  far  the  most  useful  editions  for  the 
ordinary  student  are,  that  of  Neue,  Leipzig,  1831,  Svo ;  that  of  Linwood,  Lond.,  1846, 
Svo  ;  and  more  particularly  that  of  Wunder,  in  Jacob  and  Host's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  con 
taining  the  text,  with  critical  and  explanatory  notes,  and  introductions,  Gotha  and  Er 
furdt,  1831-1846,  2  vols.  8vo,  in  7  parts,  and  with  a  supplemental  part  of  emendations  to 
the  Trachinise,'  Grima,  1841,  Svo.  The  editions  of  separate  plays  are,  as  may  be  sup 
posed,  exceedingly  numerous.  Among  the  number  the  following  are  deserving  of  espe 
cial  mention:  the  "Ajax,"  by  Lobeck,  Leipzig,  1835,  2d  ed.,  and  with  English  notes  by 
Pitman,  London,  1830  ;  the  "  (Edipus  Coloneus,"  by  Reisig,  Jena,  1820,  and  by  Elmsley, 
London,  1823,  Svo ;  and  the  "Antigone"  by  Wex,  Leipzig,  1829-31,  2  vols.  Svo,  and  by 
Boeckh  with  a  German  version  and  notes,  Berlin,  1843,  Svo.  A  very  useful  and  learned 
commentary  on  Sophocles  is  contained  in  the  valuable  "  Lexicon  Sophoeleum"  of  Ellendt, 
Konigsberg,  1835,  2  vols.  Svo. 

II.  EuRiPiDEs2  (EvpiiriSrjs)  was  the  son  of  Mnesarchus  and  Clito,  and  is 
said  to  have  been  born  at  Salamis,  B.C.  480,  on  the  very  day  that  the 
Greeks  defeated  the  Persians  off  that  island,  whither  his  parents  had  fled 
from  Athens  on  the  invasion  of  Xerxes.  Muller  regards,  however,  the 
account  of  his  having  been  born  on  the  day  of  the  battle  as  a  mere  legend,3 
and  other  scholars  also  look  with  suspicion  on  the  way  in  which  it  was 
thus  contrived  to  bring  the  three  great  tragic  poets  of  Athens  into  con 
nection  with  the  most  glorious  day  in  her  annals.*  Thus  it  has  been 
said  that  while  Euripides  then  first  saw  the  light,  JEschylus,  in  the  ma 
turity  of  manhood,  fought  in  the  battle,  and  Sophocles,  a  beautiful  boy  of 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  s  Ibid. 

3  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  358.  *  Hartung,  Eurip.  Restitut.,  p.  10. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  189 

fifteen,  led  the  chorus  in  the  festival  which  celebrated  the  victory.  Ac 
cording  to  another  account,  he  received  his  name  in  commemoration  of 
the  battle  of  Artemisium,  which  took  place  near  the  Euripus,  not  long 
before  he  was  born,  a^d  in  the  same  year ;  but  Euripides  was  not  a  new 
name,  and  had  already  belonged  to  an  earlier  tragic  writer  mentioned  by 
Suidas.  Some  writers  relate  that  the  parents  of  Euripides  were  in  mean 
circumstances,  and  his  mother  is  represented  by  Aristophanes  as  an  herb- 
seller,  and  not  a  very  honest  one  either;1  but  much  weight  can  not  be 
accorded  to  these  statements.  It  is  more  probable  that  his  family  was 
respectable.2  We  are  told  that  the  poet,  when  a  boy,  was  cup-bearer  to 
a  chorus  of  noble  Athenians  at  the  Thargelian  festival,  an  office  for  which 
nobility  of  blood  was  requisite.3  We  know,  also,  that  he  was  taught  rhet 
oric  by  Prodicus,  who  was  certainly  not  moderate  in  his  terms  for  in 
struction,  and  who  was  in  the  habit  of  seeking  his  pupils  among  youths 
of  high  rank.*  It  is  said  that  the  future  distinction  of  Euripides  was  pre 
dicted  by  an  oracle,  promising  that  he  should  be  crowned  with  "  sacred 
garlands,"  in  consequence  of  which  his  father  had  him  trained  to  gym 
nastic  exercises  ;  and  we  learn  that,  while  yet  a  boy,  he  won  the  prize 
at  the  Eleusinian  and  Thesean  contests,  and  offered  himself,  when  sev 
enteen  years  old,  as  a  candidate  at  the  Olympic  games,  but  was  not  ad 
mitted  because  of  some  doubt  about  his  age.5  Some  trace  of  his  early 
gymnastic  pursuits  has  been  remarked  in  the  detailed  description  of  the 
combat  between  Eteocles  and  Polynices  in  the  Phoenissse.6 

Soon,  however,  abandoning  these  pursuits,  he  studied  the  art  of  paint 
ing,7  not,  as  we  learn,  without  success ;  and  it  has  been  observed  that 
the  veiled  figure  of  Agamemnon  in  the  Iphigenia  of  Timanthes  was  prob 
ably  suggested  by  a  line  ih  Euripides'  description  of  the  same  scene.8 
To  philosophy  and  literature  he  devoted  himself  with  much  interest  and 
energy,  studying  physics  under  Anaxagoras,  and  rhetoric,  as  we  have  al 
ready  seen,  under  Prodicus.  We  learn  also  from  Athenseus  that  he  was 
a  great  book-collector,  and  it  is  recorded  of  him  that  he  committed  to 
memory  certain  treatises  of  Heraclitus,  which  he  found  hidden  in  the 
temple  of  Diana,  and  which  he  was  the  first  to  introduce  to  the  notice  of 
Socrates.9  His  intimacy  with  the  latter  is  beyond  a  doubt,  though  we 
must  reject  the  statement  of  Gellius,  that  he  received  instruction  from 
him  in  moral  science,  since  Socrates  was  not  born  till  B.C.  468,  twelve 
years  after  the  birth  of  Euripides.  Traces  of  the  teaching  of  Anaxago 
ras  have  been  remarked  in  many  passages  both  of  the  extant  plays  and 
of  the  fragments,  and  were  impressed  especially  on  the  lost  tragedy  of 
"Melanippa  the  Wise."10 

Euripides  is  said  to  have  written  a  tragedy  at  the  age  of  eighteen ;  but 
the  first  play  which  was  exhibited  in  his  own  name  was  the  Peliades, 
when  he  was  twenty-five  years  of  age  (B.C.  455).  In  B.C.  441  he  gained, 

1  Aristopk.,  Acharn.,  454;  Thesm.,  387,  456  ;  Plin.,  H.  N.,  xxii.,  22.         2  Suid.,  s.  v. 
3  *****••>  x.,  p.  424,  E.  *  Plat.,  Apol.,  p.  19,  E;  Stallb.  ad  loc. 

(Enom.  ap.  Eustb.,  Praep.  Evang.,  v.  33  ;  GelL,  xv.,  20.  6  v.  1392,  seqq. 

1  Thorn.  Mag.,  Vit.  Eur. ;  Suid.,  s.  v.          8  jph.  in  AuL^  1550i          9  Athen.,  i.,  p.  3,  A. 
10  Orest.,  545,  971  ;  Pars,  ad  loc. ;  Pragm.  Melanipp.,  ed.  Wagner,  p.  255. 


190  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

for  the  first  time,  the  first  prize,  and  he  continued  to  exhibit  plays  until 
B.C.  408,  the  date  of  the  "  Orestes."  Soon  after  this  he  left  Athens  for 
the  court  of  Archelaus,  king  of  Macedonia,  his  reasons  for  which  step 
can  only  be  matter  of  conjecture.  Traditionary  scandal  has  ascribed  it 
to  his  disgust  at  the  intrigue  of  his  wife  with  Cephisophon,  and  the  ridi 
cule  which  was  showered  upon  him  in  consequence  by  the  comic  poets. 
But  the  whole  story  has  been  refuted  by  modern  writers.1  Other  causes 
must,  therefore,  have  led  him  to  accept  an  invitation  from  Archelaus,  at 
whose  court  the  highest  honors  awaited  him.  The  attacks  of  Aristopha 
nes  and  others  had  probably  not  been  without  their  effect ;  and  he  must 
have  been  aware  that  his  philosophical  tenets  were  regarded  with  consid 
erable  suspicion.  He  died  in  Macedonia  in  B.C.  406.  Most  testimonies 
agree  in  stating  that  he  was  torn  in  pieces  by  the  king's  dogs,  which,  ac 
cording  to  some,  were  set  upon  him  through  envy  by  Arrhidaeus  and  Cra- 
teuas,  two  rival  poets.  The  Athenians  sent  to  ask  for  his  remains,  but 
Archelaus  refused  to  give  them  up,  and  buried  them  in  Macedonia  with 
great  honor.  The  regret  of  Sophocles  for  his  death  is  said  to  have  been 
so  great,  that,  at  the  representation  of  his  next  play,  he  made  his  actors 
appear  uncrowned.  The  statue  of  Euripides  in  the  theatre  at  Athens  is 
mentioned  by  Pausanias.  The  admiration  felt  for  him  by  foreigners,  even 
in  his  lifetime,  may  be  illustrated  not  only  by  the  patronage  of  Archelaus, 
but  also  by  what  Plutarch  records,  that  many  of  the  Athenian  prisoners 
in  Sicily  regained  their  liberty  by  reciting  his  verses  to  their  masters,  and 
that  the  Caunians,  on  one  occasion,  having  at  first  refused  to  admit  into 
their  harbor  an  Athenian  ship  pursued  by  pirates,  allowed  it  to  put  in  when 
they  found  that  some  of  the  crew  could  repeat  fragments  of  his  poems.2 
We  have  already  intimated  that  the  accounts  which  we  find  in  Athe- 
naeus  and  others  of  the  profligacy  of  Euripides  are  mere  idle  scandal,  and 
scarcely  worthy  of  serious  refutation.3  Nor  does  there  appear  to  be  any 
better  foundation  for  that  other  charge,  which  has  been  brought  against 
him,  of  hatred  to  the  female  sex.  This  is  said  to  have  been  occasioned 
by  the  infidelity  of  his  wife,  but,  as  has  already  been  remarked,  this  tale 
does  not  deserve  credit.  Euripides,  like  his  master  Anaxagoras,  was  a 
man  of  serious  temper  and  averse  to  mirth,*  and  it  was  in  consequence 
of  this  that  the  charge  probably  originated.  It  is  certain  that  the  poet 
who  drew  such  characters  as  Antigone,  Iphigenia,  and,  above  all,  Alces- 
tis,  was  not  blind  to  the  gentleness,  the  strong  affection,  the  self-aban 
doning  devotedness  of  woman.  With  respect  to  the  world  and  the  Deity, 
he  seems  to  have  adopted  the  doctrines  of  his  master,  not  unmixed  ap 
parently  with  pantheistic  views.5  To  class  him  with  atheists,  as  some 
have  done,  is  undoubtedly  unjust.  At  the  same  time,  it  must  be  confessed 
that  \ve  look  in  vain  in  his  plays  for  the  high  faith  of  JEschylus  ;  nor  can 
we  fail  to  admit  that  the  pupil  of  Anaxagoras  could  not  sympathize  with 
the  popular  religious  system  around  him,  nor  throw  himself  cordially  into 
it.  He  frequently,  also,  altered  in  the  most  arbitrary  manner  the  ancient 

1  Hartung,  p.  165,  seqq.  2  Smith,  I.  c. 

3  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  557,  E;  p.  603,  E.        *  Gell.,  xv.,  20 ;  compare  JEL,  F.  H.,  viii.,  13. 

*  Valck.  Diatr.,  p.  4,  seqq. ;  Hartung,  §  47. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  191 

legends.  Thus,  in  the  "  Orestes,"  Menelaus  comes  before  us  as  a  selfish 
coward ;  in  the  "  Helena,"  the  notion  of  Stesichorus  is  adopted  that  the 
heroine  was  never  carried  to  Troy  at  all,  and  that  it  was  a  mere  etSwAoi/ 
of  her  for  which  the  Greeks  and  Trojans  fought.1 

With  Euripides  tragedy  is  brought  down  into  the  sphere  of  every-day 
life.  Men  are  represented,  according  to  the  remark  of  Sophocles,  not  as 
they  ought  to  be,  but  as  they  are.  Under  the  names  of  the  ancient  heroes, 
the  characters  of  his  own  times  are  set  before  us ;  it  is  not  Iphigenia,  or 
Medea,  or  Alcestis,  that  is  speaking,  but  a  daughter,  a  mother,  or  a  wife.8 
All  this,  indeed,  gave  fuller  scope,  perhaps,  for  the  exhibition  of  passion, 
and  for  those  scenes  of  tenderness  and  pathos  in  which  Euripides  espe 
cially  excelled  ;  and  it  will  serve  also  to  account,  in  a  great  measure,  foi 
the  preference  given  to  his  plays  by  the  practical  Socrates,  who  is  said  to 
have  never  entered  the  theatre  unless  when  they  were  acted,  as  well  as 
for  the  admiration  felt  for  him  by  Menander  and  Philemon,  and  other 
poets  of  the  new  comedy.  The  most  serious  defects  in  his  tragedies,  art 
istically  speaking,  are  his  constant  employment  of  the  "  Deus  ex  machi- 
na;"  the  disconnection  of  his  choral  odes  from  the  subject  of  the  play; 
the  extremely  awkward  and  formal  character  of  his  prologues  ;  and  the 
frequent  introduction  of  frigid  yviafiai  and  of  philosophical  disquisitions, 
making  Medea  talk  like  a  sophist,  and  Hecuba  like  a  free-thinker,  and 
aiming  rather  at  subtilty  than  simplicity.  On  the  same  principles  on 
which  he  brought  his  subjects  and  characters  to  the  level  of  common  life, 
he  adopted  also  in  his  style  the  every-day  mode  of  speaking,  and  Aristotle 
commends  him  as  having  been  the  first  to  produce  an  effect  by  the  skill 
ful  employment  of  words  from  the  ordinary  language  of  men,  peculiarly 
fitted,  it  may  be  observed,  for  the  expression  of  the  gentler  and  more  ten 
der  feelings.  Euripides  was  held  in  high  estimation  by  Cicero  and  Quin- 
tilian,  the  latter  of  whom  says  that  he  is  worthy  of  being  compared  with 
the  most  eloquent  pleaders  of  the  Forum  ;3  while  Cicero  so  admired  him 
that  he  is  said  to  have  had  in  his  hand  his  tragedy  of  the  "  Medea"  at  the 
time  of  his  murder.* 

According  to  some  accounts,  Euripides  wrote,  in  all,  75  plays  ;  accord 
ing  to  others,  92.  Of  these,  IS  are  extant,  if  we  omit  the  "  Rhesus,"  the 
genuineness  of  which  has  been  defended  by  Vater  and  Hartung,  while 
Valckenaer,  Hermann,  and  Miilier  have,  on  good  grounds,  pronounced  it 
spurious.  To  what  author,  however,  or  to  what  period  it  should  be  as 
signed,  is  a  disputed  point.5  A  list  is  here  subjoined  of  the  extant  plays 
of  Euripides,  with  their  dates,  ascertained  or  probable  :  1.  Alcestis,  B.C. 
438.  This  play  was  brought  out  as  the  last  of  a  tetralogy,  and  stood, 
therefore,  in  the  place  of  a  satyric  drama,  to  which,  indeed,  it  bears,  in 
some  parts,  great  similarity,  particularly  in  the  representation  of  Hercu 
les  in  his  cups.  2.  Medea,  B.C.  431.  3.  Hippolytus  Coronifer,  B.C.  428, 
gained  the  first  prize.  4.  Hecuba.  Exhibited  before  B.C.  423.  5.  Her- 

1  Compare  Herod.,  ii.,  112,  seqq.  2  Keble,  Pr&lect.  Acad.,  p.  596. 

3  Cic.,  Ep.  ad  Fam.,  xvi.,  8;  Quint.,  Inst.  Or.,  x.,  1.       *  Ptol.  Hephaet.,  v.,  5. 
5  Valck.,  Diatr.,  9,  10  ;  Herm.,  De  Rheso  trag.,  Opusc.,  vol.  iii. ;  Miilier,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit., 
p.  380.  note. 


192  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

adidcz,  about  B.C.  421.  6.  Supplices,  about  B.C.  421.  7.  Ion,  of  uncer 
tain  date.  8.  Hercules  Furens,  of  uncertain  date.  9.  Andromache,  about 
B.C.  420-417.  10.  Troades,  B.C.  415.  11.  Electra,  about  B.C.  415-413. 
12.  Helena,  B.C.  412.  13.  Iphigenia  among  the  Tauri,  of  uncertain  date. 
14.  Orestes,  B.C.  408.  15.  Phcenissa,  of  uncertain  date.  16.  Baccha. 
This  play  was  apparently  written  for  representation  in  Macedonia,  and 
therefore  at  a  very  late  period  of  the  life  of  Euripides.  17.  Iphigenia  at 
Aulis.  This  play,  together  with  the  Bacchae  and  the  Alcmseon,  was 
brought  out  at  Athens,  after  the  poet's  death,  by  the  younger  Euripides. 
18.  Cyclops,  of  uncertain  date.  It  is  interesting  as  the  only  extant  speci 
men  of  the  Greek  satyric  drama. 

Besides  the  plays,  there  are  extant  five  letters,  purporting  to  have  been 
written  by  Euripides,  but  they  are  spurious.  They  are  generally  append 
ed  to  the  editions  of  the  entire  plays,  and  are  also  given  in  the  Collection 
of  Greek  letters  by  Aldus  and  others.  Three  of  these  letters  are  ad 
dressed  to  King  Archelaus,  and  the  other  two  to  Sophocles  and  Cephiso- 
phon  respectively.  Among  those  who  deny  their  authenticity  may  be 
named  Bentley.  Barnes  declares  in  their  favor  ! 

EDITIONS    OP    EURIPIDES. 

The  Editio  Princeps  of  Euripides  contains  the  Medea,  Hippolytus,  Alcestis,  and  Androm 
ache,  in  capital  letters.  It  is  without  date  or  printer's  name,  but  is  supposed,  with  much 
probability,  to  have  been  edited  by  J.  Lascaris,  and  printed  by  De  Alopa,  at  Florence,  to 
ward  the  end  of  the  15th  century.  In  1503,  an  edition  was  published  by  Aldus,  at  Ven 
ice  ;  it  contains  18  plays,  including  the  "  Rhesus,"  and  omitting  the  "  Electra."  An 
other,  published  at  Heidelberg  in  1597,  contained  the  Latin  version  of  JEmilius  Portus, 
and  a  fragment  of  the  Danae,  for  the  first  time,  from  some  ancient  MSS.  in  the  Palatine 
library.  Another  was  published  by  P.  Stephens,  Geneva,  1602.  In  that  of  Barnes,  Cam 
bridge,  1694,  whatever  be  the  defects  of  Barnes  as  an  editor,  much  was  done  toward  the 
correction  and  illustration  of  the  text.  It  contains  also  many  fragments,  and  the  spuri 
ous  letters.  Other  editions  are  that  of  Musgrave,  Oxford,  1778,  4  vols.  4to ;  of  Beck, 
Leipzig,  1778-88,  3  vols.  8vo  ;  of  Matthise,  Leipzig,  1813-1829,  9  vols.  8vo ;  a  variorum 
edition,  published  at  Glasgow  in  1821,  9  vols.  8vo ;  the  edition  of  Dindorf,  the  text 
merely,  contained  in  his  Poetas  Scenici  Gr&ci,  reprinted  at  Oxford,  1832-40,  4  vols.  8vo, 
with  a  commentary  ;  that  of  Pflugk,  in  the  Biblintheca  Graca  of  Jacobs  and  Host,  Lips., 
1829,  &c.,  continued  after  Pflugk's  death  by  Klotz,  still  in  a  course  of  publication  ;  and 
that  of  Fix,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca,  Paris,  1840.  The  fragments  have  been  edited  in  a 
separate  form  by  Wagner,  Wratislaw,  1844,  reprinted  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca.  Of  separ 
ate  plays  there  have  been  numerous  editions  ;  but  the  most  important  and  valuable  are 
those  by  Porson,  Elmsley,  Valckenaer,  Monk,  and  Hermann.  Person  edited  four  plays, 
the  Hecuba,  Orestes,  Phoenissas.  and  Medea,  with  critical  notes,  and  valuable  prefatory 
matter.  His  work  was  reprinted  at  Leipzig,  under  the  supervision  of  Schaefer.  Elm 
sley  edited  the  Medea,  Heraclida;,  and  Bacchas;  Valckenaer  edited  the  Phcenissce  and  Hip 
polytus  ;  Monk,  the  Alcestis  and  Hippolytus ;  and  Hermann,  the  Hecuba,  Phcenissae,  He 
lena,  Andromache,  Iphigenia  among  the  Tauri,  Iphigenia  at  Aulis,  Cyclops,  and  the  Ores 
tes. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  193 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

FOURTH   OR   ATTIC   PERIOD  —  continued. 
THE     OTHER     TRAGIC     POETS.1 

I.  WE  may  consider  ourselves  fortunate  in  possessing,  as  specimens 
of  Greek  tragedy,  master-pieces  by  those  poets  whom  their  contempora 
ries  and  all  antiquity  unanimously  regarded  as  the  heroes  of  the  tragic 
stage.     ^Eschylus,  Sophocles,  and  Euripides  are  the  names  which  contin 
ually  recur  whenever  the  ancients  speak  of  the  height  which  tragic  poet 
ry  attained  at  Athens ;  the  state  itself  distinguished  them  by  founding 
institutions  the  object  of  which  was  to  preserve  their  works  pure  and 
unadulterated,  and  to  protect  them  from  being  interpolated  at  the  caprice 
of  the  actors.     According  to  a  law  proposed  by  the  orator  Lycurgus,  au 
thentic  copies  of  the  works  of  the  three  great  tragic  poets  were  kept  in 
the  archives  at  Athens,  and  it  was  the  duty  of  the  public  secretary  (ypa/j.- 
/j.a.T€vs  TT)S  Tr6xea>s)  to  see  that  the  actors  delivered  this  text  only.8 

II.  Their  contemporaries  among  the  tragic  writers  must  be  regarded 
as,  for  the  most  part,  far  from  insignificant  poets,  inasmuch  as  they  main 
tained  their  places  on  the  stage  beside  them,  and  not  unfrequently  gained 
the  tragic  prize  in  competition  with  them.     Yet,  though  their  separate 
productions  may  have  been  in  part  happy  enough  to  merit  most  fully  the 
approbation  of  the  public,  the  general  character  of  these  poets  must  have 
been  deficient  in  that  depth  and  peculiar  force  of  genius  by  which  the 
great  tragic  poets  were  distinguished.     If  this  had  not  been  the  case,  their 
works  would  assuredly  have  attracted  greater  attention,  and  have  been 
read  more  frequently  in  later  times. 

III.  NEOPHRON  (Ne(ty>p<wj>)  or  NEOPHON  (Neo(/>o>j>),  of  Sicyon,  appears  to 
have  been  one  of  the  most  ancient  of  these  poets,  and  is  placed  by  Clin 
ton  before  the  age  of  Euripides.     In  the  scholia  to  the  "  Medea"  of  the 
latter,  we  have  two  fragments  of  a  play  written  on  the  same  subject  by 
Neophron,  one  of  four  lines  at  verse  668,  and  another  of  five  lines  at 
verse  1354.     Besides  these,  we  have  fifteen  lines  quoted  by  Stobseus 
from  the  same  tragedy.     Suidas  states  that  he  wrote  120  tragedies,  that 
the  "  Medea"  of  Euripides  was  sometimes  attributed  to  him,  and  that  he 
was  the  first  to  introduce  on  the  stage  the  irafiaytoyds,  and  the  examina 
tion  of  slaves  by  torture.     In  one  particular,  namely,  that  the  "  Medea" 
of  Euripides  was  sometimes  attributed  to  him,  Suidas  is  confirmed  by 
Diogenes  Laertius ;  but  when  the  former  adds  that  Neophron  was  in 
volved  in  the  fate  of  Callisthenes,  and  put  to  death  by  Alexander  the 
Great,  he  violates  chronology,  and  evidently  confounds  Neophron  with  a 
later  tragedian  named  Nearchus.3    As  far  as  we  can  judge  from  the  frag 
ments  of  Neophron  already  mentioned,  Euripides  may  have  borrowed  his 

1  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  381.  2  Plut.,  Vit.  Decem  Orat.,  p.  841,  seqq. 

3  Elms,  ad  Eurip.,  Med.,  p.  68 ;  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  134. 


194  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

plot  and  characters  from  him,  but  certainly  not  his  style.1  The  frag 
ments  are  given  in  Wagner's  collection,  in  Didot's  Biblwtheca  Graca. 

IV.  ION  i?Io>j/),  of  Chios,  was  one  of  the  five  Athenian  tragic  poets  of 
the  canon.  He  lived  at  Athens  in  the  time  of  JEschylus  and  Cimon,  and 
in  the  fragments  of  his  writings  speaks  of  the  events  of  their  day  as  from 
personal  knowledge.  He  was  a  very  comprehensive  writer,  and,  what 
was  very  uncommon  in  ancient  times,  a  prose  author  as  well  as  a  poet. 
He  wrote  a  history,  entitled  Xtov  KT'KTIS,  in  the  dialect  and  after  the  man 
ner  of  Herodotus,  except  that  he  paid  more  attention  to  the  private  life 
of  distinguished  individuals.  This  work  was  probably  the  same  with  the 
(ruyxpa^Tj,  which  is  quoted  by  Pausanias.2  Another  prose  work  was  en 
titled  KotrfjLo\oyiK6sj  identical  probably  with  the  philosophical  work  named 
rpiaj/j.6s  (or  rpiay^oi),  which  seems  to  have  been  a  treatise  on  the  consti 
tution  of  things  according  to  the  theory  of  triads,  and  which  some  ancient 
writers  ascribed  to  Orpheus.  Another  work,  entitled  {nrofj.vrtfji.ara,  seems 
to  have  contained  either  an  account  of  his  own  travels,  or  of  the  visits 
of  great  men  to  Chios.3 

Ion  did  not  come  forward  as  a  tragedian  until  B.C.  452,  after  the  death 
of  ^Eschylus,  whose  place,  it  seems,  he  expected  to  fill  on  the  stage.  The 
materials  of  his  dramas  were  in  a  great  measure  taken  from  Homer ;  they 
may  have  been  connected  in  trilogies  like  those  of  ^Eschylus  ;  the  few  re 
mains,  however,  hardly  allow  us  to  trace  the  connection  of  these  trilog- 
ical  compositions.  He  is  mentioned  as  third  in  competition  with  Eurip 
ides  and  lophon  in  01.  87,  4  (B.C.  429-428) ;  and  he  died  before  B.C.  419, 
as  appears  from  the  "  Peace"  of  Aristophanes,4  which  was  brought  out  in 
that  year.  Only  one  victory  of  Ion's  is  mentioned,  on  which  occasion,  it. 
is  said,  having  gained  the  dithyrambic  and  tragic  prizes  at  the  same  time, 
he  presented  every  Athenian  with  a  pitcher  of  Chian  wine.5  Hence  it 
would  seem  that  he  was  a  man  of  considerable  wealth.  The  number  of 
his  tragedies  is  variously  stated  at  twelve,  thirty,  and  forty.  We  have 
the  titles  and  a  few  fragments  of  eleven.  Longinus  describes  the  style 
of  Ion's  tragedies  as  marked  by  petty  refinements  and  want  of  boldness, 
and  he  adds  an  expression,  which  shows  the  distance  that  there  was,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  ancients,  between  the  great  tragedians  and  the  best  of 
their  rivals,  that  no  one  in  his  senses  would  compare  the  value  of  the 
"  GEdipus"  with  that  of  all  the  tragedies  of  Ion  taken  together.  Never 
theless,  he  was  greatly  admired,  chiefly,  it  would  seem,  for  a  sort  of  ele 
gant  wit.  There  are  some  beautiful  passages  in  the  extant  fragments 
of  his  tragedies.  Commentaries  were  written  upon  him  by  Arcesilaus, 
Batton  of  Sinope,  Didymus,  Epigenes,  and  even  by  Aristarchus.  Besides 
his  tragedies,  we  are  told  by  the  scholiast  on  Aristophanes  that  Ion  also 
wrote  lyric  poems,  comedies,  epigrams,  paeans,  hymns,  scolia,  and  elegies. 
Respecting  his  comedies  a  doubt  has  been  raised,  on  account  of  the  con 
fusion  between  comedy  and  tragedy,  which  is  so  frequent  in  the  writings 
of  the  grammarians  ;  but,  in  the  case  of  so  universal  a  writer  as  Ion,  the 

1  Elms.,  I.  c. ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  9.  v.  -  Pausan.,  vii.,  4,  8. 

;!   Bentley,  Ep.  ad  Mill.  ;  Opusc.,  p.  494,  seqq.<  eil,  Lips.  *  Aristoph.,  Pax.  830. 

6  Schol.  ad  Aristnph..  1.  r. ;  Athen.,  i.,  p.  3,  F, 


ATTIC     PERIOD. 


195 


probability  seems  to  be  in  favor  of  the  scholiast's  statement.  Of  his  ele 
gies  we  have  still  some  remnants  in  the  Greek  Anthology,1  which  are 
given  also  in  the  collections  of  Schneidewin  and  Bergk.  The  fragments 
of  Ion  have  been  published,  with  an  account  of  his  life,  &c.,  by  Nieber- 
ding,  Lips.,  1836,  and  Kopke,  Berol.,  1836.  They  are  contained  also  in 
Wagner's  Fragm.  Trag.  Gr&c. 

V.  ARISTARCHUS  ('ApiffTapxos),  of  Tegea,  was  contemporary  with  Eu 
ripides,  and  flourished  about  454  B.C.     He  lived  to  the  age  of  a  hundred. 
Out  of  seventy  tragedies  which  he  exhibited,  only  two  obtained  the  prize.8 
Nothing  remains  of  his  works  except  a  few  lines,3  and  the  titles  of  three 
of  his  plays,  namely,  the  'A.a-K\.riiri6s,  which  he  is  said  to  have  written  and 
named  after  the  god  in  gratitude  for  his  recovery  from  illness  ;  the  'AX<A.- 
\ets,  which  Ennius  translated  into  Latin  ;*  and  the  Tdi>ra\os.5     The  frag 
ments  are  contained  in  Wagner's  Fragm.  Trag.  Grac. 

VI.  ACH^US  (JAxa«fc),  of  Eretria,  in  Euboea,  was  born  B.C.  484,  the 
year  in  which  JEschylus  gained  his  first  victory,  and  four  years  before 
the  birth  of  Euripides.     In  B.C.  447,  he  contended  with  Sophocles  and 
Euripides,  and  though  he  subsequently  brought  out  many  dramas,  accord 
ing  to  some  as  many  as  thirty  or  forty,  he  nevertheless  only  gained  the 
prize  once.     The  fragments  of  Achaeus  contain  much  strange  mythology, 
and  his  expressions  were  often  forced  and  obscure.6     Still,  in  the  satyr- 
ical  drama,  he  must  have  possessed  considerable  merit,  for  in  this  depart 
ment  some  ancient  critics  thought  him  inferior  only  to  ./Eschylus.7     The 
titles  of  seven  of  his  satyrical  dramas  and  ten  of  his  tragedies  are  still 
known.     The  extant  fragments  of  his  pieces  have  been  collected  and 
edited  by  Urlichs,  Bonn,  1834,  and  are  also  contained  in  Wagner's  Fragm. 
Trag.  Grac.     This  Achaeus  must  not  be  confounded  with  a  later  tragic 
writer  of  the  same  name,  a  native  of  Syracuse,  who,  according  to  Suidas 
and  Phavorinus,  wrote  ten,  but,  according  to  Eudocia,  fourteen  tragedies.8 

VII.  CARCINUS  (Kop/cfr/os),  of  Athens,  was  a  very  skillful  scenic  dancer,9 
and  is  occasionally  alluded  to  by  Aristophanes.10     His  dramas,  of  which 
no  fragments  have  come  down  to  us,  seem  to  have  perished  at  an  early 
day.     Another  tragic  poet  of  the  same  name  appears  to  have  been  a 
grandson  of  the  first,  and  is  probably  the  same  as  the  one  who  spent  a 
great  part  of  his  life  at  the  court  of  Dionysius  the  younger  at  Syracuse.11 
The  tragedies  which  are  referred  to  by  the  ancients  under  the  name  of 
Carcinus  probably  all  belong  to  the  younger  one.     Suidas  attributes  to 
him  160  tragedies,  but  we  possess  the  titles  and  fragments  of  nine  only, 
and  some  fragments  of  uncertain  dramas.     His  style  is  said  by  some  of 
the  ancient  writers  to  have  been  marked  by  studied  obscurity  ;  though  in 
the  fragments  extant  we  can  scarcely  perceive  any  trace  of  this  obscurity, 
and  their  style  bears  a  close  resemblance  to  that  of  Euripides.1 2   The  frag 
ments  of  the  younger  Carcinus  are  given  in  Wagner's  Fragm.  Trag.  Grac. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Euseb.,  Chron.  Armen. 


3  Stob.,  tit.  63,  ^  9  ;  tit.  120,  ^>  2 ;  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  612,  F. 

5  Stob.,  ii.,  1,  U-  6  Athen.,  x.,  p.  451,  G. 

8  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

10  Aristoph.,  Nub.,  1263;  Pax,  794. 

12  Meineke,  Hist.  Crit.  Com.  Grcec..  p.  505,  seqq. ;  Smith.  I 


Festus,  s.  v.  prolato  are. 
Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  133. 
Athen.,  i.,  p.  22. 
Dwg.  Laert.,  ii.,  7. 
ct.  Biogr.,  s,  v. 


196  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

VIII.  AGATHON  ('AydOcov)  was  born  about  B.C.  447,  and  sprung  from  a 
rich  and  respectable  Athenian  family.  He  was  contemporary  with  Soc 
rates  and  Alcibiades,  and  the  other  distinguished  characters  of  their  age, 
with  many  of  whom  he  was  on  terms  of  intimate  acquaintance.  Among 
these  was  his  friend  Euripides.  He  was  remarkable  for  the  handsome 
ness  of  his  person,  and  his  various  accomplishments.1  He  gained  his 
first  victory  at  the  Lenaean  festival  in  B.C.  416,  when  he  was  a  little  above 
thirty  years  of  age  ;  in  honor  of  which  Plato  represents  the  symposium 
or  banquet  to  have  been  given,  which  he  has  made  the  occasion  of  his 
dialogue  so  called.  The  scene  is  laid  at  Agathon's  house,  and  among  the 
interlocutors  are  Apollodorus,  Socrates,  Aristophanes,  Diotima,  and  Al 
cibiades.  Plato  was  then  fourteen  years  of  age,  and  a  spectator  at  ;he 
tragic  contest  in  which  Agathon  was  victorious.2  When  Agathon  was 
about  forty  years  of  age  (B.C.  407),  he  visited  the  court  of  Archelaus,  king 
of  Macedonia,3  where  his  old  friend  Euripides  was  also  a  guest  at  the 
same  time.  He  is  generally  supposed  to  have  died  about  B.C.  400,  at 
the  age  of  forty-seven.* 

The  poetic  merits  of  Agathon  were  considerable,  but  his  compositions 
were  more  remarkable  for  elegance  and  flowery  ornaments,  than  force, 
vigor,  or  sublimity.  They  abounded  in  antithesis  and  metaphor,  and  he 
is  said  to  have  imitated  in  verse  the  prose  of  Gorgias  the  philosopher. 
The  style  of  his  verses,  and  especially  of  his  lyric  compositions,  is  rep 
resented  by  Aristophanes  as  affected  and  effeminate,  corresponding  with 
his  personal  appearance  and  manner.5  In  another  play,  however,  acted 
five  years  afterward,  Aristophanes  speaks  of  him  in  high  terms  both  as  a 
poet  and  a  man.  In  some  respects  Agathon  was  instrumental  in  causing 
the  decline  of  tragedy  at  Athens.  He  was  the  first  tragic  poet,  accord 
ing  to  Aristotle,6  who  adopted  the  practice  of  inserting  choruses  between 
the  acts,  the  subject-matter  of  which  was  unconnected  with  the  story  of 
the  piece,  and  which  were,  therefore,  called  e^^At^a,  or  intercalary,  as 
being  merely  lyrical  or  musical  interludes.  Agathon  also  wrote  pieces, 
the  story  and  characters  of  which  wrere  the  creations  of  pure  fiction.  One 
of  these  was  called  the  "Flower"  ("Ai/0os);7  its  subject-matter  was  nei 
ther  mythical  nor  historical,  and  therefore  probably  neither  seriously  af 
fecting  nor  terrible.  We  can  not  but  regret  the  loss  of  this  work,  which 
must  have  been  both  amusing  and  original.  The  titles  of  only  four  of  his 
tragedies  are  known  with  certainty  ;  they  are  the  "  Thyestes,"  the  "  Tel- 
ephus,"  the  "  Aerope,"  and  the  "  Alcmseon."  A  fifth,  wrhich  is  ascribed 
to  him,  is  of  doubtful  authenticity.  The  opinion  that  Agathon  also  wrote 
comedies  has  been  refuted  by  Bentley,  in  his  Dissertation  upon  the  Epis 
tles  of  Euripides-8  The  fragments  of  Agathon  are  given  in  Wagner's 
Fragm.  Trag.  Grac. 

JX.  About  this  time  the  tragic  stage  received  a  great  influx  of  poets, 
which,  however,  does  not  prove  that  a  great  advance  had  taken  place  in 


i  Plat.,  Protag.,  p,  156,  B.  2  Atken,  v,,  p.  217,  A.  3  JElian,  V.  H.,  xiii.,  4. 

4  Bode,  Gesch.  d.  Dram.  Dichtk.,  i.,  p.  553.  5  Aristoph.,  Thesmoph.,  p.  191. 

«  Aristot.,  Pott.,  18,  $  22.  7  Ibid.,  9,  $  1. 

*  Ritschl,  Comment,  df  Agaihonis  vita,  &c.,  IIali«,  1839,  8vo  ;  Smith,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  197 

the  art  of  tragic  poetry.1  Aristophanes  speaks  of  thousands  of  tragedy- 
making  babblers,  more  garrulous  by  a  good  deal  than  Euripides.  He  calls 
their  poems  muses'  groves  for  swallows,  comparing  their  trifling  and  in 
significant  attempts  at  polite  literature  with  the  chirping  of  birds.  Hap 
pily  these  dilettanti  were  generally  satisfied  with  presenting  themselves 
once  before  the  people  as  tragic  poets.  There  was  such  a  taste  for  the 
composition  of  tragedies,  that  we  find,  among  those  who  wrote  for  the 
stage,  men  of  the  most  different  pursuits  and  dispositions ;  such  as  CRITIAS, 
the  head  of  the  oligarchical  party  at  Athens,  and  DIONYSIUS  the  elder,  ty 
rant  of  Syracuse,  who  often  came  forward  as  a  competitor  for  the  tragic 
prize,  and  had  the  satisfaction  of  receiving  the  crown  once  before  he  died. 
Such  men  were  fond  of  availing  themselves  of  tragedy,  in  the  same  way 
that  Euripides  did,  as  a  vehicle  for  bringing  before  the  public,  in  a  less 
suspicious  manner,  their  speculations  on  the  political  and  social  interests 
of  their  auditors.  In  the  drama  called  Sisyphus  (which  is, perhaps, more 
rightly  ascribed  to  Critias  than  to  Euripides),  there  was  a  development 
of  the  pernicious  doctrine  of  the  sophists,  that  religion  was  an  ancient 
political  institution,  designed  to  sanction  the  restraints  of  law  by  super- 
adding  the  fear  of  the  gods ;  and  we  are  told  that  Dionysius  wrote  a  drama 
against  Plato's  theory  of  the  state,  which  was  called  a  tragedy,  but  had 
rather  the  character  of  a  comedy.  It  is  well  known,  too,  that  PLATO  also 
composed  a  tetralogy  in  his  younger  days,  which  he  committed  to  the 
flames  when  he  had  convinced  himself  that  dramatic  poetry  was  not  his 
vocation.2 

X.  The  families  of  the  great  poets  contributed  in  a  considerable  degree 
to  continue  the  tragic  art  after  their  death.     As  the  great  poets  not  only 
felt  themselves  called  upon  by  their  own  taste  to  devote  themselves  to 
dramatic  poetry,  and  to  bring  out  plays  and  teach  the  chorus  year  after 
year,  but  really  practiced  this  art  as  an  ostensible  profession,  we  can  not 
wonder  that  this,  like  other  employments  and  trades,  was  transmitted 
by  a  regular  descent  to  their  sons  and  grandsons.     JEschylus  was  fol 
lowed  by  a  succession  of  tragedians,  who  flourished  through  several  gen 
erations.     His  son  EUPHORION,  as  we  have  before  remarked,  sometimes 
brought  out  plays  of  his  father's  which  had  not  been  represented  before, 
sometimes  pieces  of- his  own,  and  he  gained,  as  we  have  seen,  the  tragic 
prize  in  competition  with  both  Sophocles  and  Euripides.     Similarly,  ^Es- 
chylus'  nephew,  PHILOCLES,  gained  the  prize  against  the  "  King  CEdipus" 
of  Sophocles,  a  piece  which,  in  the  opinion  of  modern  times,  is  not  to  be 
surpassed.     Philocles  must  have  had  a  good  deal  of  his  uncle's  manner. 
MORSIMUS,  the  son  of  Philocles,  seems  to  have  done  but  little  honor  to  the 
family ;  but,  after  the  Peloponnesian  war,  the  ^Eschyleans  gained  new 
lustre  from  ASTYDAMAS,  who  brought  out  240  pieces,  and  gained  fifteen 
victories.     From  these  numbers  we  see  that  Astydamas  in  his  time  sup 
plied  the  Athenian  public  with  new  tetralogies  almost  every  year  at  the 
Lenaea  and  great  Dionysia,  and  that,  on  an  average,  he  gained  the  prize 
once  every  four  contests.3 

XI.  With  regard  to  the  family  of  Sophocles,  IOPHON  was  an  active  and 
1  Mailer,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  384.  2  Mullcr,  1.  c.  3  Id,  ib. 


198  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

popular  tragedian  in  his  father's  lifetime,  and  Aristophanes  considers  him 
as  the  only  support  of  the  tragic  stage  after  the  death  of  the  two  great 
poets.  We  do  not  know,  however,  in  what  manner  a  later  age  answered 
the  comedian's  doubtful  question,  whether  lophon  would  be  able  to  do  as 
much  by  himself,  now  that  he  was  deprived  of  the  benefit  of  his  father's 
counsel  and  guidance.  Some  years  later,  the  younger  SOPHOCLES,  the 
grandson  of  the  great  poet,  came  forward,  at  first  with  the  legacy  of  un 
published  dramas  which  his  grandfather  had  left  him,  and  soon  after  with 
plays  of  his  own.  As  he  gained  the  prize,  according  to  one  statement, 
twelve  times,  he  must  have  been  one  of  the  most  prolific  poets  of  the  da> 
He  was  undoubtedly  the  most  considerable  rival  of  the  JEschylean  Asty- 
damas.  He  did  not  begin  to  exhibit  his  own  dramas  until  B.C.  396.  He 
had  previously,  in  B.C.  401,  brought  out  the  "  GEdipus  Coloneus"  of  his 
grandfather,  followed  very  probably  by  other  plays  of  the  latter.1 

XII.  A  younger  EURIPIDES  also  gained  some  reputation  by  the  side  of 
these  descendants  of  the  other  two  tragedians.     He  stands  on  the  same 
footing  in  relation  to  his  father  as  Euphorion  to  ^Eschylus,  and  the  younger 
Sophocles  to  his  grandfather ;  he  first  brought  out  plays  by  his  distin 
guished  parent,  and  then  tried  the  success  of  his  own  productions.     Sui- 
das  mentions  also  a  nephew  of  the  great  poet  of  the  same  name,  to 
whom  he  ascribes  the  authorship  of  three  plays,  "  Medea,"  "  Orestes,"  and 
"  Polyxena,"  and  who,  he  tells  us,  gained  a  prize  with  one  of  his  uncle's 
tragedies,  after  the  death  of  the  latter.     It  is  probable,  however,  that  the 
son  and  the  nephew  have  been  confounded  by  him. 

XIII.  By  the  side  of  these  successors  of  the  great  tragedians  others 
from  time  to  time  made  their  appearance,  and  in  them  we  may  see  more 
distinct  traces  of  those  tendencies  of  the  age,  which  were  not  without 
their  influence  on  the  others.     In  them  tragic  poetry  appears  no  longer 
as  independent,  and  as  following  its  own  object  and  its  own  laws,  but  as 
subordinated  to  the  spirit  which  had  developed  itself  in  other  branches  of 
literature.     The  lyric  poetry  and  the  rhetoric  of  the  time  had  an  especial 
influence  on  the  form  of  tragic  poetry. 

XIV.  How  much  CH^REMON  (Xaip^uwj/),  who  flourished  about  B.C.  380, 
was  possessed  with  the  spirit  of  the  lyric  poetry  of  his  time,  is  clear  from 
all  that  is  related  of  him.     The  contemporary  dithyrambic  poets  were 
continually  making  sudden  transitions  in  their  songs  from  one  species  of 
tones  and  rhythms  to  another,  and  sacrificed  the  unity  of  character  to  a 
striving  after  metrical  variety  of  expression.     But  nobody  went  farther 
than  Chaeremon  in  this,  for,  according  to  Aristotle,  he  mixed  up  all  kinds 
of  metres  in  his  KeVraupos,  which  seems  to  have  been  a  most  extraordi 
nary  compound  of  epic,  lyric,  and  dramatic  poetry.     His  dramatic  pro 
ductions  were  rich  in  descriptions,  wrhich  did  not,  like  those  of  the  old 
tragedians,  belong  to  the  pieces,  and  contribute  to  place  in  a  clearer  light 
the  condition,  the  relations,  the  deeds  of  some  person  engaged  in  the  ac 
tion,  but  sprung  altogether  from  a  fondness  for  delineating  subjects  which 
produce  a  pleasing  impression  on  the  senses.     No  tragedian  could  be  com 
pared  with  Chaeremon  in  the  number  of  his  charming  pictures  of  female 

1  Mullcr,  p.  387. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  199 

beauty,  in  which  the  serious  muse  of  the  great  tragedians  is  exceedingly 
chaste  and  retiring ;  the  only  counterpoise  to  this  is  his  passion  for  the 
multifarious  perfumes  and  colors  of  flowers,  in  the  description  of  which 
he  luxuriates.  With  this  mixture  of  foreign  ingredients,  tragedy  ceases 
to  be  a  drama,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word,  in  which  every  thing  de 
pends  on  the  causes  and  developments  of  actions,  and  on  manifestations 
of  the  will  of  man.  Accordingly,  Aristotle  calls  this  Chseremon,  in  con 
nection  with  the  dithyrambic  poet  Licymnius,  poets  to  be  read  (avayvwffTi- 
Koi),  and  says  of  the  former,  in  particular,  that  he  is  exact,  that  is,  careful 
and  accurate  in  detail,  like  a  professed  writer,  whose  sole  object  is  the 
satisfaction  of  his  readers.1  The  fragments  of  Chaeremon  have  been  col 
lected  by  Bartsch,  Mogunt..  1843,  4to,  and  are  also  contained  in  Wagner's 
Fragm.  Trag.  Grcec. 

XV.  But  this  later  tragedy  was  still  more  powerfully  affected  by  the 
rhetoric  of  the  time,  that  is,  the  art  of  speaking  as  taught  in  the  school. 
Dramatic  poetry  and  oratory  were  so  near  one  another  from  the  begin 
ning,  that  they  often  seem  to  join  hands  over  the  gap  which  separates 
poetry  from  prose.     The  object  of  oratory  is  to  determine  by  means  of 
argument  the  convictions  and  the  will  of  other  men ;  but  dramatic  poetry- 
leaves  the  actions  of  the  persons  represented  to  be  determined  by  the 
development  of  their  own  views  and  the  expression  of  the  opinions  of 
others.     The  Athenians  were  so  habituated  to  hear  long  public  speeches 
in  their  courts  and  assemblies,  and  had  such  a  passion  for  them,  that  their 
tragedy,  even  in  its  better  days,  admitted  a  greater  proportion  of  speeches 
on  opposite  sides  of  a  question  than  would  have  been  the  case  had  their 
public  life  taken  another  direction.     But,  in  process  of  time,  this  element 
was  continually  gaining  upon  the  others,  and  soon  transcended  its  proper 
limits,  as  we  see  even  in  Euripides,  and  still  more  in  his  successors. 
The  excess  consists  in  this,  that  the  speeches,  which  in  a  drama  should 
only  serve  as  a  means  of  explaining  the  thoughts  and  frame  of  mind  of 
the  actors,  and  of  influencing  their  convictions  and  resolves,  became,  on 
their  own  account,  the  chief  business  of  the  play,  so  that  the  situations 
and  all  the  labor  of  the  poet  were  directed  toward  affording  opportunities 
for  the  display  of  rhetorical  sparring.     And  as  the  practical  object  of  real 
life  was,  naturally  enough,  wanting  to  this  stage-oratory,  and  as  it  de 
pended  on  the  poet  alone  how  he  should  put  the  point  of  dispute,  it  is  easy 
to  conceive  that  this  theatrical  rhetoric  would,  in  most  cases,  make  a  dis 
play  of  the  more  artificial  forms,  which,  in  practical  life,  were  thrown 
aside  as  useless,  and  would  approximate  rather  to  the  scholastic  oratory 
of  the  sophists  than  to  the  eloquence  of  a  Demosthenes,  which,  possessed 
by  the  great  events  of  the  time,  raised  itself  far  above  the  trammels  of  a 
scholastic  art.2 

XVI.  THEODECTES  (©eoSe/mjs),3  of  Phaselis,  the  chief  specimen  of  this 
class  of  writers,  flourished  about  B.C.  356,  in  the  time  of  Philip  of  Mace- 
don.     Rhetoric  was  his  chief  study,  although  he  also  applied  himself  to 
philosophy.     He  belongs  to  the  scholars  of  Isocrates,4  another  of  whom, 

1  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  387 ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

'  Muller,  Hist,  Gr.  Lit.,  p.  388.          3  Id.  ib.          4  Pseudo-Plut,,  Vit.  Isocr.,  10,  p.  837,  /). 


200 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


a  son  of  Aphareus,  also  left  the  rhetorical  school  for  the  tragic  stage. 
Theodectes  never  gave  up  his  original  pursuits,  but  came  forward  both 
as  an  orator  and  tragedian.  At  the  splendid  funeral  feast  which  the  Ca- 
rian  queen,  Artemisia,  instituted  in  honor  of  Mausolus,1  the  husband  whom 
she  mourned  for  so  ostentatiously,  Theodectes,  in  competition  with  Theo- 
pompus  and  other  orators,  delivered  a  panegyric  on  the  deceased,  and  at 
the  same  time  produced  a  tragedy,  the  Mausolus,  the  materials  for  which 
were  probably  borrowed  from  the  mythical  traditions  or  early  history  of 
Caria,  but  which  had  also  in  view,  of  course,  the  exaltation  of  the  prince 
of  the  same  name  just  deceased.  In  the  competition  of  oratory,  on  this 
occasion,  Theodectes  was  defeated  by  Theopompus ;  but  his  tragedy 
gained  the  prize,  and  was  extant  down  to  the  time  of  Gellius.2  Theo 
dectes,  indeed,  had  so  hit  the  taste  of  the  age  in  his  tragedies,  that  he 
obtained  eight  victories  in  thirteen  contests.  Aristotle,  who  was  his 
friend,  and,  according  to  some,  his  teacher  also,  made  use  of  his  trage 
dies  as  furnishing  him  with  examples  of  rhetoric.  For  excellence  in  the 
art  of  rhetoric,  indeed,  as  it  was  practiced  by  the  school  of  Isocrates, 
Theodectes  appears  to  have  possessed  the  highest  qualifications.  Dio- 
uysius  places  him  with  Aristotle,  at  the  head  of  the  writers  on  the  art  of 
rhetoric.3  Some  even  appear  to  have  believed  the  "  Rhetoric"  of  Aris 
totle  to  be  the  work  of  Theodectes ;  but  this  is  a  manifest  error.4 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD—  continued. 

GREEK     COMEDY. 


I.  COMEDY  (Ko^wSia)  took  its  rise  at  the  vintage  festivals  of  Bacchus." 
It  originated,  as  Aristotle6  remarks,  with  those  who  led  off  the  phallic 
songs  of  the  comus  (KW^OS)  or  band  of  revellers,  who,  at  the  vintage  fes 
tivals  of  Bacchus,  gave  expression  to  the  feelings  of  exuberant  joy  and 
merriment  which  were  regarded  as  appropriate  to  the  occasion,  by  pa 
rading  about,  partly  on  foot,  partly  in  wagons,  singing  a  wild,  jovial  song 
in  honor  of  Bacchus  and  his  companions.  These  songs  were  commonly 
interspersed  with  or  followed  by  petulant,  extemporaneous  witticisms, 
with  which  the  revellers  assailed  the  by-standers.  This  origin  of  comedy 
is  indicated  by  the  name  /coyi$>5fa,  which  undoubtedly  means  "  the  song 
of  the  Comus"  (nda/uiov  $5-})).  This  appears  both  from  the  testimony  of 
Aristotle,  that  it  arose  out  of  the  phallic  songs,  and  from  the  language  of 
Demosthenes,7  in  whom  we  find  mentioned  together  6  KU/J-OS  KCU  ol  KW/AU- 
Soi.8  Other  derivations  of  the  name  were,  however,  given  even  in  an 
tiquity.  The  Megarians,  conceiving  it  to  be  connected  with  the  word 


1  Suid.,  s.  v.;  Aul.  GelL,  x.,  18.  2  Ge/Z.,  i  c. 

3  Dion  Hal.,  De  Comp.  Verb.,  2;  Devi  die.  in  Dem.,  48. 

*  Quintil.,  ii.,  15,  10 ;  Spalding,  ad  loc. ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

5  Smith,  Diet.  Ant.,  s.  v.  6  Pott.,  4.  7  c.  Mid.,  p.  517. 

8  MitJlcr,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  4  ;  Dor.,  iv.,  7,  1. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  201 

K(*>/j.ri,  "  a  village,"  and  to  mean  "  village-song,"  appealed  to  the  name  as 
an  evidence  of  the  superiority  of  their  claim  to  be  regarded  as  the  origin 
ators  of  Comedy  over  that  of  the  Athenians.1  This  derivation  was  also 
adopted  by  several  of  the  old  grammarians,  and  has  the  sanction  of  Bent- 
ley,  W.  Schneider,  and  even  of  Bernhardy.3 

II.  It  was  among  the  Dorians  that  comedy  first  assumed  any  thing 
of  a  regular  shape.     The  Megarians,  both  in  the  mother  country  and  in 
Sicily,  claimed  to  be  considered  its  originators,  as  we  have  just  remarked ; 
and  so  far  as  the  comedy  of  Athens  is  concerned,  the  claim  of  the  former 
appears  well  founded.     They  were  always  noted  for  their  coarse  humor,3 
and  their  democratical  constitution,  which  was  established  at  an  early 
period,  favored  the  development  of  comedy  in  the  proper  sense  of  the 
word.     In  the  aristocratical  states,  the  mimetic  impulse,  as  connected 
with  the  laughable  or  the  absurd,  was  obliged  to  content  itself  with  a 
less  unrestrained  mode  of  manifestation. 

III.  Among  the  Athenians,  the  first  attempts  at  comedy,  according  to 
the  almost  unanimous  accounts  of  antiquity,  were  made  at  Icaria,  an  At 
tic  demus,  by  Susarion,  a  native  of  Tripodiscus,  in  Megaris.4    Icaria  was 
the  oldest  seat  of  the  worship  of  Bacchus  in  Attica,5  and  comus  proces 
sions  must  undoubtedly  have  been  known  there  long  before  the  time  of 
Susarion.     From  the  jests  and  railleries  directed  by  the  Bacchic  comus, 
as  it  paraded  about,  against  the  by-standers,  or  any  others  whom  they  se 
lected,  arose  the  proverb  ra  e£  afj-dfys.6 

IV.  It  was  B.C.  578  that  Susarion  introduced  at  Icaria  comedy,  in  that 
stage  of  development  to  which  it  had  attained  among  the  Megarians.7     It 
is  not  easy,  however,  to  decide  in  what  his  improvements  consisted.    Of 
course  there  were  no  actors  besides  the  chorus  or  comus;  whatever 
there  was  of  drama  must  have  been  performed  by  the  latter.     The  intro 
duction  of  an  actor  separate  from  the  chorus  was  an  improvement  not 
yet  made  in  the  drama.     According  to  one  grammarian,  he  was  the  first 
who  adopted  the  metrical  form  of  language  for  comedy.8     It  is  not,  how 
ever,  to  be  inferred  that  the  comedies  of  Susarion  were  written.     Bent- 
ley  has  shown  that  the  contrary  is  probably  true.     He  no  doubt  merely 
substituted  for  the  more  ancient  improvisations  of  the  chorus  and  its 
leader,  premeditated  compositions,  though  still  of  the  same  general  kind. 
There  would  also  seem  to  have  been  some  kind  of  poetical  contest,  for 
we  learn  that  the  prize  for  the  successful  poet  was  a  basket  of  figs  and  a 
jar  of  wine.9     It  was  also  the  practice  of  those  who  took  part  in  the  co 
mus  to  smear  their  faces  with  wine-lees,  either  to  prevent  their  features 
from  being  recognized,  or  to  give  themselves  a  more  grotesque  appear 
ance.     Hence  comedy  came  to  be  called  rpvycpSia,  or  "  lees-song,"  though 
others  connected  the  name  with  the  circumstance  of  a  jar  of  new  wine 

Aristot.,  Poet.,  3.  2  Grundriss  der  Griech.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  892. 

Aristoph.,  Vesp.,  57  ;  Schol.  ad  loc. ;  Suid.,  s.  v.  ye'Ato?. 

Schol.  ad  Dion.  Thrac.,  in  Bekker's  Anecd.  Grcec.,  ii.,  p.  748.     5  Athen.,  ii.,  p.  40. 
Schol.  ad  Aristoph.,  Equit.,  544  ;  Nub.,  296.  7  Smith,  Diet.  Ant.,  s.  v. 

Schol.  ad  Dion.  Thrac.,  in  Bekker's  Anecd.  Gr.,  ii.,  p.  748. 

Harm.  Par.,  ep.  40 ;  Bockh,  Corp.  Inscript.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  301  ;  Bentley,  Phal.,  vol.  i.,  p. 
259,  ed.  Dyce, 


202  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

(rpu|)  being  the  prize  for  the  successful  poet.1  The  comedies  of  Susa- 
rion  were,  according  to  the  common  account,  acted  upon  wagons.  But 
Meineke  has  rendered  the  truth  of  this  assertion  extremely  doubtful. 
His  plays  very  probably  partook  of  that  petulant,  coarse,  and  unrestrained 
personality  for  which  the  Megarian  comedy  was  noted.  For  entertain 
ments  of  such  a  character  the  Athenians  were,  however,  not  yet  prepared. 
It  required  the  freedom  of  a  democracy.  Accordingly,  comedy  was  dis 
couraged,  and  for  eighty  years  after  the  time  of  Susarion  we  have  noth 
ing  of  it  in  Attica. 

V.  It  was,  however,  in  Sicily  that  comedy  was  earliest  brought  to 
something  like  perfection.     The  Greeks  in  Sicily  always  exhibited  a  live 
ly  temperament,  and  the  gift  of  working  up  any  occurrence  into  a  spirit 
ed,  fluent  dialogue.3     This  faculty  finding  its  stimulus  in  the  excitement 
produced  by  the  political  contests,  which  were  so  frequent  in  the  differ 
ent  cities,  and  the  opportunity  for  its  exercise  in  the  numerous  rustic 
festivals  connected  with  the  worship  of  Ceres  and  Bacchus,  it  was  natu 
ral  that  comedy  should  early  take  its  rise  among  them.     Yet  before  the 
time  of  the  Persian  wars,  we  only  hear  of  iambic  compositions,  and  of  a 
single  poet,  Aristoxenus.     The  performers  were  called  avToitd&8a\oi,  or 
improvisatori,3  and  subsequently  fa,uj8ot,  and  their  entertainments,  being 
of  a  choral  character,  were  doubtless  accompanied  by  music  and  dancing. 
Afterward,  the  comic  element  was  developed  partly  into  travesties  of  re 
ligious  legends,  partly  into  delineations  of  character  and  manners ;  the 
former  in  the  comedy  of  Epicharmus,  Phormis,  and  Dinolochus ;  the  lat 
ter  in  the  mimes  of  Sophron  and  Xenarchus.      Epicharmus  is  very  com 
monly  called  the  inventor  of  comedy  by  the  grammarians  and  others  ; 
this,  however,  is  true  only  of  that  more  artistical  shape  which  he  gave 
it.*    We  will  treat  more  fully  of  this  writer  in  a  subsequent  part  of  the 
present  work. 

VI.  In  Attica,  the  first  comic  poet  of  any  importance  whom  we  hear  of 
after  Susarion  is  CHIONIDES,  who  is  said  to  have  brought  out  plays  in  B.C. 
487,  about  eight  years  before  the  second  Persian  war.     Such,  at  least,  is 
the  account  of  Suidas.     On  the  other  hand,  according  to  a  passage  in  the 
Poetic  of  Aristotle,5  Chionides  was  long  after  Epicharmus.    On  the  strength 
of  this  passage,  Meineke  thinks  that  Chionides  can  not  be  placed  much 
earlier  than  B.C.  460,  and,  in  confirmation  of  this  date,  he  quotes  from 
Athenaeus6  a  passage  from  a  play  of  Chionides,  the  IIT&>XOI,  in  which 
mention  is  made  of  Gnesippus,  a  poet  contemporary  with  Cratinus.     But 
we  also  learn  from  Athenaeus  that  some  of  the  ancient  critics  considered 
the  Uruxoi  to  be  spurious,  and  with  respect  to  the  passage  from  Aristo 
tle,  Ritter  has  brought  forward  some  very  strong  arguments  against  its 
genuineness.7    We  have  some  titles  and  fragments  remaining  of  the 
pieces  of  Chionides.     They  are  given  by  Meineke,  in  the  Comic.  Grac. 

1  Athen.,  ii.,  p.  40 ;  Anon.,  De  Com.,  ap.  Meineke,  p.  535,  &c. 

2  Cic.,  Verr.,  iv.,  43  ;  Orat.,  ii.,  54. 

3  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  622  ;  Etym.  Mag.,  s.  v.  avTOKdpS.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Ant.,  s.  v. 
6  Poet.,  3.  6  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  638,  A. 
i  Ritter,  Comm.  in  Aristot.  Poet.,  3  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  203 

Fragm.,vol.  i.,  p.  3,  seqq.,  ed.  rnin.  The  only  other  writer  of  this  period 
deserving  of  mention  is  MAGNES,  a  native  of  Icaria,  in  Attica.1  He  is 
mentioned  by  Aristotle  in  such  a  manner  as  to  imply  that  he  was  con 
temporary,  or  nearly  so,  with  Chionides  ;2  and  from  this  and  other  state 
ments  of  the  ancient  writers  it  has  been  inferred  that  he  flourished  about 
B.C.  460  and  onward.  There  appears  to  have  been  a  great  deal  of  coarse 
buffoonery  in  his  pieces.3  According  to  Suidas  and  Eudocia,  he  exhib 
ited  nine  plays,  and  gained  two  victories ;  a  statement  obviously  at  vari 
ance  with  what  Aristophanes  says  of  him.  An  anonymous  writer  on 
comedy  assigns  to  him  eleven  victories,  and  states  that  none  of  his  dra 
mas  were  preserved,  but  that  nine  were  falsely  ascribed  to  him.  It  is 
worthy  of  notice  that  Magnes  is  the  earliest  comic  poet  of  whom  we  find 
any  victories  recorded.  Only  a  few  titles  of  his  works  remain,  together 
with  some  fragments  scarcely  exceeding  half  a  dozen  lines.4  The  frag 
ments  are  given  by  Meineke,  Comic.  Grac.  Fragm.,  vol.  i.,  p.  5-6,  ed.  min. 

VII.  That  branch  of  the  Attic  drama  which  was  called  the  Old  Comedy 
begins  properly  with  Cratinus,  who  was  to  comedy  very  much  what 
JEschylus  was  to  tragedy.     As  in  the  Attic  drama  there  can  plainly  be 
traced  various  stages  of  progress  before  it  arrived  at  that  which  in  mod 
ern  times  is  considered  the  true  form  of  comedy,  namely,  the  comedy  of 
character  or  manners,  it  has  been  customary  to  divide  it  into  three  spe 
cies,  which  are  termed  the  Old,  Middle,  and  New  comedy.     These  divi 
sions  are  of  course  arbitrary,  and,  as  the  advance  from  one  stage  to 
another  took  place  gradually,  it  is  somewhat  difficult  to  determine  accu 
rately  the  epoch  when  each  species  gave  place  to  the  succeeding  one. 
The  middle  comedy,  however,  is  considered  by  the  best  modern  authori 
ties  to  have  commenced  about  B.C.  375,  with  Eubulus,  and    to  have 
continued  until  about  B.C.  330,  when  Philemon  and  Menander,  the  au 
thors  of  the  New  Comedy,  began  to  exhibit.5 

OLD     COMEDY. 

VIII.  The  characteristic  feature  of  the  Old  Comedy  is  personality.     It 
has  been  described  as  the  comedy  of  caricature,  and  such  indeed  it  was, 
but  it  was  also  a  great  deal  more.     Real  personages  were  exhibited  on 
the  stage,  and  the  shafts  of  the  poet's  ridicule  were  fearlessly  directed 
against  them.     As  it  appeared  in  the  hands  of  its  great  masters,  Crati 
nus,  Hermippus,  Eupolis,  and  especially  Aristophanes,  its  main  charac 
teristic  was  that  it  was  throughout  political.     Every  thing  that  bore  upon 
the  political  or  social  interests  of  the  Athenians  furnished  materials  for 
it.     It  assailed  every  thing  that  threatened  liberty,  religion,  and  the  old 
established  principles  of  social  morality  and  taste,  and  tended  to  detract 
from  the  true  nobleness  of  the  Greek  character.     It  performed,  in  short, 
the  functions  of  a  public  censorship.6    Though  merely  personal  satire, 
having  no  higher  object  than  the  sport  of  the  moment,  was  by  no  means 
excluded,  though  the  secrets  of  domestic  life  were  laid  open,  its  sanctity 

1  Suid.,  s.  v.  2  Aristot.,  Poet.,  3.  3  Diomedes,  iii.,  p.  486. 

4  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.         5  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  vol  ii.  ;  Introd.,  p.  xxxvi.,  seqq. 
*  Hor.,  Serm.,  i.,  4.  1,  seqq  ;  Isocr.,  De  pace,  p,  161. 


204 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


violated,  and  the  faults  of  private  character  held  up  to  odium  or  ridicule, 
yet  commonly  it  is  on  political  or  general  grounds  that  individuals  are 
brought  forward  and  satirized.  A  ground-work  of  reality  usually  lay  at 
the  basis  of  the  most  imaginative  forms  which  its  wild  license  adopted. 
All  kinds  of  fantastic  impersonations  and  mythological  beings  were  mixed 
up  with  those  of  real  life.  With  such  unbounded  stores  of  materials  for 
the  subject  and  form  of  comedies,  complicated  plots  were  of  course  un 
necessary,  ana  were  not  adopted. 

IX.  All  this  abuse  and  slander,  and  caricature  and  criticism,  were  con 
veyed  in  the  most  exquisite  and  polished  style ;  it  was  recommended  by 
all  the  refinements  of  taste  and  the  graces  of  poetry.     It  was  because  of 
this  exquisite  elegance  and  purity  which  distinguished  the  style  of  the 
Attic  comedy,  as  well  as  its  energetic  power,  that  Quintilian  recommends 
an  orator  to  study,  as  the  best  model  next  to  Homer,  the  writings  of  the 
Old  Attic  comedy.     Doubtless  it  abounded  in  grossness  and  impurity, 
such  as  would  not  for  a  moment  be  tolerated  in  dramatic  exhibitions  of 
the  present  day.     But  an  age  in  which  man  was  not  softened  by  the  in 
fluence  of  good  female  society,  and  in  which  the  virtuous  of  the  female 
sex  were  not'educated  so  as  to  fit  them  for  being  companions  of  man, 
was  necessarily  a  gross  one.     The  comic  poet,  therefore,  was  not  the 
corruptor  of  his  countrymen.     The  worst  that  can  be  said  against  him  is, 
that  he  did  not  stem  the  tide  of  corruption,  that  he  pandered  to  a  degrad 
ed  popular  taste,  instead  of  using  his  best  endeavors  to  mould  it  to  a 
higher  standard.1 

X.  The  old  comedy  was  to  the  Athenians  the  representative  of  many 
influences  which  exist  in  the  present  day.     It  was  the  newspaper — the 
review — the  satire — the  pamphlet — the  caricature — the  pantomime  of 
Athens.     Addressed  to  the  thousands  who  flocked  to  the  theatre  to  wit 
ness  the  representation  of  a  new  comedy,  most  of  whom  were  keenly 
alive  to  every  witty  allusion  and  stroke  of  satire,  and  who  took  a  deep  in 
terest  in  every  thing  of  a  public  nature,  because  each  individual  was  per 
sonally  engaged  in  the  administration  of  state  affairs,  the  old  comedy 
must  have  been  a  powerful  engine  for  good  or  for  evil.     There  can  be 
little  doubt  that,  scurrilous  and  immoral  as  it  was,  the  good  nevertheless 
predominated .     Gross  and  depraved  as  the  Athenians  were  already,  not 
withstanding  their  refinement,  it  is  not  likely  that  comedy  corrupted  their 
morals  in  this  respect.     The  vices  which  prevailed  wrould  have  existed 
without  it,  and  were  neither  increased  nor  fostered  by  it.     But  the  comic 
poet  seems,  generally  speaking,  to  have  been  on  the  side  of  that  which 
was  good  in  taste,  in  education,  in  politics.     Fostered  as  the  free  satire 
of  comedy  was  by  the  unbounded  license  of  a  democracy,  and  owing  its 
vigor,  as  well  as  its  existence,  to  the  patronage  of  a  sovereign  people,  it 
neither  spared  the  vices,  nor  flattered  the  follies  of  its  patrons.     Like 
those  of  the  court-fool  in  the  Middle  Ages,  its  most  biting  jests  were  re 
ceived  with  good  humor,  and  welcomed  as  acceptable  by  its  supporters, 
although  they  themselves  were  the  object  of  them.2 

XL  Notwithstanding,  however,  the  favor  with  which  the  old  comedy 

1  Brown,e,  Hist.  Class.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  20,  seq.  2  Id.  i7>.,  p.  21,  seq. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  205 

was  viewed  by  the  people,  its  extreme  personality  sometimes  provoked 
the  interference  of  the  law.  In  B.C.  440,  a  law  was  passed  rov  ^  KU/J.^- 
Seli/,1  which  remained  in  force  for  three  years,  when  it  was  repealed. 
Some  understand  the  law  to  have  been  a  prohibition  of  comedy  altogeth 
er  ;2  others,3  a  prohibition  merely  against  bringing  forward  individuals  in 
their  proper  historic  personality,  and  under  their  own  name,  in  order  to 
ridicule  them  (^  /ca^wBeTv  bvo^affri).  During  the  period  when  this  law 
remained  in  force,  the  comic  chorus,  as  Horace*  tells  us,  "  turpiter  obticuit, 
sublato  jure  nocendi."  To  this  same  period  probably  belongs  the  law,  that 
no  Areopagite  should  write  comedies.5  About  B.C.  415,  apparently  at  the 
instigation  of  Alcibiades,  whose  vanity,  ambition,  and  support  of  the  new 
systems  of  philosophy  and  education  had  drawn  upon  him  the  enmity  of 
the  comic  poets,  the  law  of  B.C.  440,  or,  at  all  events,  a  law  ^  KtopipStiv 
ovo/j-affrl,  was  again  passed,  but  this  law  only  remained  in  force  for  a  short 
time.  The  nature  of  the  political  events  in  the  ensuing  period  would  of 
itself  act  as  a  check  upon  the  license  of  the  comic  poets.  With  the  over 
throw  of  the  democracy  in  B.C.  411,  comedy  would  of  course  be  si 
lenced,  but  on  the  restoration  of  the  democracy  it  revived.  It  was  doubt 
less  again  restrained  by  the  Thirty  tyrants.  During  the  latter  part  of  the 
Peloponnesian  war,  also,  it  became  a  matter  of  difficulty  to  get  choragi ; 
and  hinderances  were  sometimes  thrown  in  the  way  of  the  comic  po 
ets  by  those  who  had  been  attacked  by  them.  Agyrrhius,  for  instance, 
though  when  is  not  known,  got  the  pay  of  the  poets  lessened. 

XII.  The  Old  Attic  comedy  lasted,  as  has  already  been  remarked,  until 
B.C.  375,  ending  with  Theopompus.     The  whole  number  of  poets  belong 
ing  to  this  division  was,  according  to  Clinton,  fifty-two.     Some,  less  ac 
curately,  make  the  old  comedy  to  have  ended  in  B.C.  404,  and  the  num 
ber  of  poets  to  have  been  forty-one. 

XIII.  It  was  not  usual  for  comic  poets  to  bring  forward  more  than  one 
or  two  comedies  at  a  time  ;  and  there  was  a  regulation  according  to  which 
a  poet  could  not  bring  forward  comedies  before  he  was  of  a  certain  age, 
which  is  variously  stated  at  thirty  or  forty  years.6     To  decide  on  the 
merits  of  the  comedies  exhibited,  five  judges  were  appointed,  wrhich  was 
half  the  number  of  those  who  adjudged  the  prize  for  tragedy.7     The  cho 
rus  in  comedy,  as  before  remarked,  consisted  of  twenty-four.    The  dance 
of  the  chorus  was  the  /cJ/>5a£,  the  movements  of  which  were  capricious 
and  licentious,  consisting  partly  in  a  reeling  to  and  fro,  in  imitation  of  a 
drunken  man,  and  partly  in  various  unseemly  and  immodest  gestures. 
For  a  citizen  to  dance  the  «Jp5a|  sober,  and  without  a  mask,  was  looked 
upon  as  the  height  of  shamelessness.8     Aristophanes,  however,  and  prob 
ably  other  comic  poets  also,  frequently  dispensed  with  the  K<fy>5a£.9     The 
most  important  of  the  choral  parts  was  the  Pardbasis,  already  described, 
when,  the  actors  having  left  the  stage,  the  chorus  turned  round  from  fac- 

Schol.  ad  Aristoph.,  Acharn.,  67.  2  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  s.  a. 

Meineke,  Hist.  Crit.  Com.  Graze.  *  Ep.  ad  Pis.,  284. 

Pint.,  DC  Glor.  Ath.,  p.  348,  c.  6  Aristoph.,  Nub.,  530  ;  Schol  ad  loc. 

Schol.  ad,  Aristoph.,  Av.,  445.  8  Theophrast.,  Charact.,  6. 
Arisloph.,  Nub.,  537,  seqq. 


206  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ing  the  performers,  and,  advancing  toward  the  spectators,  delivered  an  ad 
dress  to  them  in  the  name  of  the  poet,  either  on  public  topics  of  general 
interest,  or  on  matters  which  concerned  the  poet  personally,  criticising 
his  rivals  and  calling  attention  to  his  own  merits  ;  the  address  having 
nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  action  of  the  play.1 

XIV.  From  the  hints  furnished  by  Aristophanes  (for  we  have  a  great 
want  of  special  information  on  the  subject),  his  comic  actors  must  have 
been  very  unlike  the  performers  of  the  new  comedy,  of  Plautus  and  Ter 
ence.2  Of  the  latter  we  know,  from  some  very  valuable  and  instructive 
paintings  in  ancient  manuscripts,  that  they  adopted,  on  the  whole,  the 
costume  of  e very-day  life,  and  that  the  form  and  mode  of  their  tunics  and 
palliums  were  the  same  as  those  of  the  actual  personages  whom  they 
represented.  The  costume  of  Aristophanes'  players  must,  on  the  other 
hand,  have  resembled  rather  the  garb  of  the  farcical  actors  whom  we  often 
see  depicted  on  vases  from  Magna  Graecia,  namely,  close-fitting  jackets 
and  trowsers  striped  with  divers  colors,  reminding  us  of  the  modern  har 
lequin  ;  to  which  were  added  great  bellies  and  other  disfigurations  pur 
posely  extravagant,  the  grotesque  form  being,  at  the  most,  but  partially 
covered  by  a  little  mantle.  Then  there  were  masks,  the  features  of  which 
were  exaggerated  even  to  caricature,  yet  so  that  particular  persons,  when 
such  were  brought  upon  the  stage,  might  at  once  be  recognized.  The 
costume  of  the  chorus  in  a  comedy  of  Aristophanes  went  farthest  into  the 
strange  and  fantastic.  His  choruses  of  birds,  wasps,  &c.,  must  not,  of 
course,  be  regarded  as  having  consisted  of  birds,  wasps,  &c.,  actually  rep 
resented,  but,  as  is  clear  from  numerous  hints  from  the  poet  himself,  of  a 
mixture  of  the  human  form  with  various  appendages  borrowed  from  the 
creatures  wre  have  mentioned ;  and  in  this  the  poet  allowed  himself  to 
give  special  prominence  to  those  parts  of  the  costume  which  he  wras  most 
concerned  about :  thus,  for  example,  in  the  "  Wasps,"  which  are  designed 
to  represent  the  swarms  of  Athenian  judges,  the  sting  was  the  chief  at 
tribute,  as  denoting  the  stylus,  with  which  the  judges  used  to  mark  down 
the  number  of  their  division  in  their  wax  tablets.  These  waspish  judges 
were  introduced  humming  and  buzzing  up  and  down,  now  thrusting  out, 
and  now  drawing  in  an  immense  spit,  which  was  attached  to  them  by 
way  of  a  gigantic  sting.3 

XV.  That  the  prevalent  form  of  the  dialogue  should  be  the  same  in 
tragedy  and  comedy,  namely,  the  iambic  trimeter,  was  natural,  notwith 
standing  the  opposite  character  of  the  twro  kinds  of  poetry ;  for  this  com 
mon  organ  of  dramatic  colloquy  was  capable  of  the  most  varied  treatment, 
and  was  modified  by  the  comic  poets  in  a  manner  most  suitable  to  their 
object.  The  avoidance  of  spondees,  the  congregation  of  short  syllables, 
and  the  variety  of  the  caesuras,  impart  to  the  verse  of  comedy  an  extra 
ordinary  lightness  and  spirit,  and  the  admission  of  anapaests  into  all  places 
of  the  verse  but  the  last,  opposed  as  this  is  to  the  fundamental  form  of 
the  trimeter,  proves  that  the  careless,  voluble  recitation  of  comedy  treat 
ed  the  long  and  short  syllables  with  greater  freedom  than  the  tragic  art 

i  Schol.adAristoph.,Nub.,518;  Pac.,733.        =  Miiller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  9,  seq. 
3  Miiller,  vol.  ii.,  p.  10. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  207 

permitted.  In  order  to  distinguish  the  different  styles  and  tunes,  comedy 
employed,  besides  the  trimeter,  a  great  variety  of  metres,  which  we  must 
suppose  were  also  distinguished  by  different  sorts  of  gesticulation  and 
delivery,  such  as  the  light  trochaic  tetrameter,  so  well  suited  to  the  dance  ; 
the  lively  iambic  tetrameter;  and  the  anapaestic  tetrameter,  flaunting 
along  in  comic  pathos,  which  had  been  used  by  Aristoxenus  of  Selinus, 
an  old  Sicilian  poet,  who  lived  before  Epicharmus.  In  all  these  things 
comedy  was  just  as  inventive  and  refined  as  tragedy.  Aristophanes  had 
the  skill  to  convey  by  his  rhythms  sometimes  the  tone  of  romping  merri 
ment,  at  others  that  of  festal  dignity  ;  and  often,  in  jest,  he  would  give  to 
his  verses  and  his  words  such  a  pomp  of  sound  that  we  lament  he  is  not 
in  earnest.1 

MIDDLE     COMEDY. 

XVI.  The  old  comedy  was  replaced  by  one  of  a  somewhat  different 
style,  which  was  known  as  the  Middle  Comedy,  the  age  of  which  lasted 
from  the  end  of  the  Peloponnesian  war  to  the  overthrow  of  liberty  by 
Philip  of  Macedon.     During  this  period,  the  Athenian  state  had  the  form, 
but  none  of  the  spirit  of  its  earlier  democratical  constitution,  and  the  en 
ergy  and  public  spirit  of  earlier  years  had  departed.     The  comedy  of  this 
period,  accordingly,  found  its  materials  in  satirizing  classes  of  people  in 
stead  of  individuals,  in  criticising  the  systems  and  merits  of  philosophers 
and  literary  men,  and  in  parodies  of  the  compositions  of  living  or  earlier 
poets,  and  travesties  of  mythological  subjects.     It  formed  a  transition 
from  the  old  to  the  new  comedy,  and  approximated  to  the  latter  in  the 
greater  attention  paid  to  the  structure  of  plots,  which  seem  frequently  to 
have  been  founded  on  amorous  intrigues,  and  in  the  absence  of  that  wild 
grotesqueness  which  marked  the  old  comedy.2 

XVII.  As  regards  external  form,  the  plays  of  the  middle  comedy,  gen 
erally  speaking,  had  neither  parabasis  nor  chorus.     The  absence  of  the 
chorus  was  occasioned,  partly  by  the  change  in  the  spirit  of  comedy  it 
self,  partly  by  the  increasing  difficulty  of  finding  persons  capable  of  under 
taking  the  duties  of  choragus.     As  the  change  in  comedy  itself  was  grad 
ual,  so  it  is  most  likely  that  the  alterations  in  form  were  brought  about 
by  degrees.     At  first,  showing  the  want  of  proper  musical  and  orchestic 
training,  the  chorus  was  at  last  dropped  altogether.     Some  of  the  frag 
ments  of  pieces  of  the  middle  comedy,  which  have  reached  us,  are  of  a 
lyrical  kind,  indicating  the  presence  of  a  chorus.      The  poets  of  this 
school  of  comedy  seem  to  have  been  extraordinarily  prolific.     Athenaeus 
says  that  he  had  read  above  800  dramas  of  the  middle  comedy.     Only  a 
few  fragments,  however,  are  now  extant.     Meineke  gives  a  list  of  thirty- 
nine  poets  of  the  middle  comedy.3     Clinton  makes  the  number  thirty- 
five.4    The  most  celebrated  were  Antiphanes  and  Alexis. 


1  Muller,  vol.  ii.,  p.  13,  seq. 

a  Bode,  Gesch.  d.  Hell.  Dichtk.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  396 ;   Muller,  vol.  ii.,  p.  46 ;   Smith,  Diet. 
Ant.,  s.  v.  3  Hist.  Crit.  Com.  Gr.,  p.  303.  *  Fast.  Hell,  vol.  ii.,  p.  xlii.,  seqq. 


208  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


NEW     COMEDY 

XVIII.  The  New  Comedy  was  a  farther  development  of  the  last-men 
tioned  kind.     It  answered  as  nearly  as  may  be  to  the  modern  comedy  of 
manners  or  character.     Dropping  for  the  most  part  personal  allusions, 
caricature,  ridicule,  and  parody,  which,  in  a  more  general  form  than  in 
the  old,  had  maintained  their  ground  in  the  middle  comedy,  the  poets  of 
the  new  comedy  made  it  their  business  to  reproduce,  in  a  generalized  form, 
a  picture  of  the  every-day  life  of  those  by  whom  they  were  surrounded. 
This  new  comedy  might  be  described,  in  the  words  of  Cicero,  as  "  imila- 
tionem  vita,  speculum  consuctudinis,  imaginem  veritatis."1     The  frequent  in 
troduction  of  sententious  maxims  was  a  point  of  resemblance  with  the 
later  tragic  poets.5 

XIX.  In  the  new  comedy  there  was  no  chorus,  and  the  dramas  were 
commonly  introduced  by  prologues,  spoken  by  allegorical  personages, 
such  as"E\e7%os,  *<fy3os,  &c.     The  new  comedy  flourished  until  B.C.  289, 
if,  with  Clinton,  we  close  the  list  with  Posidippus.     But  others  give  B.C. 
260.     The  number  of  poets  belonging  to  the  new  comedy  was  estimated 
in  antiquity  at  sixty-four,  but,  as  Bernhardy  remarks,  it  is  now  impossible 
to  find  even  the  half  of  this  number.     Clinton  gives  the  names  of  twenty, 
beginning  with  Philippides,  and  ending,  as  before  remarked,  with  Posidip 
pus.3 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

FOURTH   OR  ATTIC   PERIOD  —  continued. 
POETS     OK     THE     OLD     COMEDY. 

I.  CRATINUS  (Kpcmj/os),*  one  of  the  most  celebrated  poets  of  the  old 
comedy,  and  who  witnessed  its  rise  and  complete  perfection  during  a 
life  of  ninety-seven  years,  was  born  B.C.  519,  but  did  not  exhibit  till  B.C. 
454,  when  he  was  sixty-five  years  of  age.5  He  exhibited  twenty-one 
plays,  and  gained  nine  victories.  He  was  the  poet,  of  the  old  comedy. 
He  gave  it  its  peculiar  character,  and  he  did  not,  like  Aristophanes,  live 
to  see  its  decline.  Before  his  time  the  comic  poets  had  aimed  at  little 
beyond  exciting  the  laughter  of  their  audience  :  it  was  Cratinus  who  first 
made  comedy  a  terrible  weapon  of  personal  attack,  and  the  comic  poet  a 
severe  censor  of  public  and  private  vice.  He  did  not  even,  like  Aristoph 
anes,  in  such  attacks  unite  mirth  with  satire,  but,  as  an  ancient  writer 
says,  he  hurled  his  reproaches  in  the  plainest  form  at  the  bare  heads  of 
the  offenders.6  Still,  like  Aristophanes  with  respect  to  Sophocles,  he 
sometimes  bestowed  the  highest  praise,  as  upon  Cimon.7  Pericles,  on 
the  other  hand,  was  the  object  of  his  most  persevering  and  vehement 
abuse.  Besides  what  Cratinus  thus  did  to  give  a  new  character  and 

i  Cic.,  De  Rep.,  iv.,  11.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Ant.,  s.  v.  3  Clinton,  p.  xlv.,  seq. 

*  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.          5  Euseb.,  Chron.,  s.  a. ;  Syncell.,  p.  339. 

e  PJatonius,  De  Com.,  p.  xxvii. ;  Christod.,  Ecphras.,  \.  357.  7  Pint.,  Cim.,  10. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  209 

power  to  comedy,  he  is  said  to  have  made  changes  in  its  outward  form, 
so  as  to  bring  it  into  better  order,  especially  by  fixing  the  number  of  act 
ors,  which  before  had  been  indefinite,  at  three.  On  the  other  hand,  how 
ever,  Aristotle  asserts  that  no  one  knew  who  made  this  and  other  such 
changes. 

The  character  of  Cratinus  as  a  poet  rests  upon  the  testimonies  of  the 
ancient  writers,  as  we  have  no  complete  play  of  his  extant.  These  test 
imonies  are  most  decided  in  placing  him  in  the  very  first  rank  of  comic 
poets.  By  one  writer  he  is  compared  to  ^Eschylus.1  His  style  s'eems  to 
have  been  somewhat  grandiloquent,  and  full  of  tropes,  and  altogether  of 
a  lyric  cast.  He  was  very  bold  in  inventing  new  words,  and  in  changing 
the  meaning  of  old  ones.  His  choruses  especially  were  very  much  ad 
mired,  and  were  for  a  time  the  favorite  songs  at  banquets.2  It  was  per 
haps  on  account  of  the  dithyrambic  character  of  his  poetry  that  he  was 
likened,  as  we  have  said,  to  JSschylus.  His  metres  seem  to  have  par 
taken  of  the  same  lofty  character.  He  sometimes  even  used  the  epic 
verse.  In  the  invention  of  his  plots,  he  was  most  ingenious  and  felici 
tous,  but  his  impetuous  and  exuberant  fancy  was  apt  to  derange  them  in 
the  progress  of  the  play.3  In  his  later  years,  Cratinus  became  much  ad 
dicted  to  drinking,  and  Aristophanes  and  the  other  comic  poets  began  to 
sneer  at  him  as  a  drivelling  old  dotard,  whose  poetry  was  fuddled  with 
wine.*  This  at  length  roused  the  spirit  of  the  veteran  dramatist,  who 
brought  out,  in  consequence,  his  comedy  of  the  Uvrij/t],  or  "  bottle,"  in 
which  he  acknowledged  the  charge  of  habitual  intemperance,  but  at  the 
same  time  treated  the  subject  in  so  amusing  a  way  as  to  bear  off  the  prize 
over  the  Connus  of  Amipsias,  and  the  Clouds  of  Aristophanes  himself.6 
In  the  following  year  Cratinus  died,  at  the  age  of  ninety-seven.  His  frag 
ments  are  given  by  Meineke,  Comic.  Grac.  Fragm.,  vol.  i.,  p.  7,  seqq.*  ed. 
min.  They  were  also  edited  separately  by  Runkel,  Lips.,  1827,  8vo. 

II.  CRATES  (Kparrjs),6  an  Athenian,  was  a  younger  contemporary  of 
Cratinus,  in  whose  plays  he  was  the  principal  actor  before  he  betook 
himself  to  writing  comedies.7  He  began  to  flourish  in  B.C.  449,  and  is 
spoken  of  by  Aristophanes  in  such  a  way  as  to  imply  that  he  was  dead 
before  the  comedy  of  the  Knights  was  acted,  B.C.  424.  It  would  appear 
from  a  passage  in  Aristotle,8  which  has  been  misunderstood  by  some, 
that,  instead  of  making  his  comedies  vehicles  of  personal  abuse,  he  chose 
such  subjects  as  admitted  of  a  more  general  mode  of  depicting  character. 
His  great  excellence  is  attested  by  Aristophanes,  though  in  a  somewhat 
ironical  tone,9  and  also  by  the  fragments  of  his  plays.  He  excelled  chief 
ly  in  mirth  and  fun,  which  he  carried  so  far  as  to  bring  intoxicated  per 
sons  on  the  stage,  a  thing  which  Epicharmus  had  done,  but  which  no 
Attic  comedian  had  ventured  on  before.10  His  example  was  followed  by 
Aristophanes  and  by  later  comedians ;  and  with  the  poets  of  the  new 
comedy  it  became  a  very  common  practice.11  Like  the  other  great  comic 

1  Anon.,  De  Com.,  p.  xxix.  2  Aristoph.,  Equit.,  526.  3  Platonius,  p.  xxvii. 

4  Aristoph.,  Equit.,  531,  seqq.        5  ^rg.  Nub.  6  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

1  Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  23  ;  Aristoph.,  Equit.,  536,  seqq.         8  Poet.,  5.          9  Aristoph.,  ?.  r. 
>°  Athen.,  x.,  p.  429,  A.  "  Dion  Chrysost.,  Orat.  32,  p,  381,  B. 


210  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

poets,  he  was  made  to  feel  strongly  both  the  favor  and  the  inconstancy 
of  the  people.  The  scholiast  on  Aristophanes  says  that  Crates  used  to 
bribe  the  spectators,  a  charge  which  Meineke  thinks  may  have  been  tak 
en  from  some  comic  poet  who  was  an  enemy  of  his.  There  is  much 
confusion  among  the  ancients  about  the  number  and  titles  of  his  plays. 
Some  grammarians  assign  to  him  seven  and  eight  comedies  respectively. 
The  result  of  Meineke's  analysis  of  the  statements  of  the  ancient  writers 
is  in  favor  of  eight.  Of  these  eight  plays  fragments  are  still  extant. 
There  are  also  several  fragments  which  can  not  be  assigned  to  their 
proper  plays.  The  language  of  Crates  is  pure,  elegant,  and  simple,  with 
very  few  peculiar  words  and  constructions.  He  uses,  however,  a  very 
rare  metrical  peculiarity,  namely,  a  spondaic  ending  to  the  anapaestic  te 
trameter.  The  fragments  are  given  by  Meineke,  Comic.  Grac.  Fragm., 
vol.  i.,  p.  78,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 

III.  HEGEMON  ('HT^uwj/),1  a  native  of  Thasos,  but  established  at  Athens, 
was  more  celebrated  for  his  parodies  than  his  regular  comic  pieces.    Ar 
istotle  makes  him  the  inventor  of  parody.     He  was  nicknamed  *a/oj,  on 
account  of  his  fondness  for  that  kind  of  pulse.     Hegemon  lived  in  the 
time  of  the  Peloponnesian  war,  and  was  contemporary  with  Cratinus, 
when  the  latter  was  an  old  man,  and  with  Alcibiades.     His  parody  of  the 
Gigantomachia  was  the  piece  to  which  the  Athenians  were  listening  when 
the  news  was  brought  to  them  in  the  theatre  of  the  total  failure  of  the  ex 
pedition  to  Sicily,  and  when,  in  order  not  to  betray  their  feelings,  they  re 
mained  in  the  theatre  to  the  end  of  the  performance.     The  only  comedy 
of  his  which  is  mentioned  is  the  4>tAiVr7,  of  which  one  fragment  is  pre 
served  by  Athenaeus,  who  also  gives  some  amusing  particulars  respect 
ing  him.2 

IV.  PHRYNICHUS  (*pwt%os),  of  Athens,  hot  to  be  confounded  with  the 
tragic  poet  of  the  same  name,  already  mentioned,  began  to  exhibit  B.C. 
435.3     He  was  ranked  by  the  grammarians  among  the  most  distinguished 
poets  of  the  old  comedy,4  and  the  elegance  and  vigor  of  his  extant  frag 
ments  confirm  this  judgment.     Aristophanes,  indeed,  attacks  him,  togeth 
er  with  other  comic  poets,  for  the  use  of  low  and  obsolete  buffoonery,5 
but  the  scholiast  on  the  passage  asserts  that  there  was  nothing  of  the 
sort  in  his  extant  plays.     He  was  also  charged  with  corrupting  both  lan 
guage  and  metre,  and  with  making  use  of  the  labors  of  others.     These 
accusations,  however,  are  probably  to  be  regarded  rather  as  indications 
of  the  height  to  which  the  rivalry  of  the  comic  poets  was  carried,  than 
as  the  statement  of  actual  truths.     On  the  subject  of  metre  we  are  in 
formed  that  Phrynichus  invented  the  Ionic  a  minor e  catalectic  verse,  which 
was  named  after  him.6    His  language  is  generally  terse  and  elegant,  but 
he  sometimes  uses  words  of  peculiar  formation.     The  celebrated  gram 
marian  Didymus,  of  Alexandrea,  wrote  commentaries  on  Phrynichus.7 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Athen.,  i.,  p.  5,  B;  Aristot.,  Poet.,  2  ;  Ritter,  ad  loc. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.,  where  B.C.  429  is  thought  the  more  probable  date,  arid 
Suidas,  who  gives  B.C.  435,  is  supposed  to  be  in  error.     Compare  Clinton,  s.  v. 
*  Anon.,DeComoed.,ip.  xxviii.  6  Ran.,  14.  6  Marius  Victor,  p.  2542,  Putsch, 

7  Athen.,  ix.,  p.  371,  F;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  211 

The  number  of  his  comedies  is  given  at  ten.  We  have  the  fragments  in 
Meineke,  Com.  Gr<zc.  Frag.,  vol.  i.,  p.  228,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 

V.  EUPOLIS  (Ev-rro\is)1  was  born  about  B.C.  446,  and  is  said  to  have  ex 
hibited  his  first  drama  in  his  seventeenth  year,  B.C.  429,  two  years  be 
fore  Aristophanes,  who  was  nearly  of  the  same  age  with  him.2  The  date 
of  his  death  is  uncertain.  The  common  story  was,  that  Alcibiades,  when 
sailing  to  Sicily,  B.C.  415,  threw  Eupolis  into  the  sea,  in  revenge  for  an 
attack  which  he  had  made  upon  him  in  his  Bdirrai.  But,  to  say  nothing 
of  the  improbability  of  even  Alcibiades  venturing  on  such  an  outrage,  or 
the  still  stranger  fact  of  its  not  being  alluded  to  by  Thucydides,  or  any 
other  trustworthy  historian,  the  answer  of  Cicero  is  conclusive,  that  Era 
tosthenes  mentioned  plays  produced  by  Eupolis  after  the  Sicilian  expedi 
tion.3  There  is  also  a  fragment  still  extant,  in  which  the  poet  applies 
the  title  ffrpaTtiyds  to  Aristarchus,  whom  we  know  to  have  been  <rrparTj- 
y6s  four  years  later  than  the  date  at  which  the  common  story  fixed  the 
death  of  Eupolis.*  He  probably  died  in  B.C.  411. 

The  chief  characteristic  of  the  poetry  of  Eupolis  seems  to  have  been 
the  liveliness  of  his  fancy,  and  the  power  which  he  possessed  of  imparting 
its  images  to  his  audience.  This  characteristic  of  his.  genius  influenced 
his  choice  of  subjects,  as  well  as  his  mode  of  treating  them,  so  that  he 
not  only  appears  to  have  chosen  subjects  which  other  poets  might  have 
despaired  of  dramatizing,  but  we  are  expressly  told  that  he  wrought  into 
the  body  of  his  plays  those  serious  political  views  which  other  poets  ex 
pounded  in  their  parabases,  as  in  the  Ar^o*,  in  which  he  represented  the 
legislators  of  other  times  deliberating  on  the  administration  of  the  state. 
To  do  this  in  a  genuine  Attic  old  comedy,  without  converting  the  comedy 
into  a  serious  philosophic  dialogue,  must  have  been  a  great  triumph  of 
dramatic  art.5  The  introduction  of  deceased  persons  on  the  stage  ap 
pears  to  have  given  to  the  plays  of  Eupolis  a  certain  dignity,  which  would 
have  been  inconsistent  with  the  comic  spirit  had  it  not  been  relieved  by 
the  most  graceful  and  clever  merriment.  In  elegance  he  is  said  to  have 
even  surpassed  Aristophanes,6  while  in  bitter  jesting  and  personal  abuse 
he  emulated  Cratinus.  Among  the  objects  of  his  satire  was  Socrates, 
on  whom  he  made  a  bitter,  though  less  elaborate  attack  than  that  in  the 
Clouds  of  Aristophanes.7  The  dead  were  not  even  exempt  from  his 
abuse,  for  there  are  still  extant  some  lines  of  his  in  which  Cimon  is  most 
unmercifully  treated.8  A  close  relation  subsisted  between  Eupolis  and 
Aristophanes,  not  only  as  rivals,  but  as  imitators  of  each  other.  Crati 
nus  attacked  Aristophanes  for  borrowing  from  Eupolis,  and  Eupolis,  in 
his  BaTTTat,  made  the  same  charge,  especially  with  reference  to  the  Knights. 
The  scholiasts  specify  the  last  parabasis  of  the  Knights  as  borrowed  from 
Eupolis.9  On  the  other  hand,  Aristophanes,  in  the  second  (or  third) 
edition  of  the  Clouds,  retorts  upon  Eupolis  the  charge  of  imitating  the 


Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Anon.,  De  Com.,  p.  xxix. 

Cic.,  Ep.  ad  Alt.,  vi.,  1.  *  Schol.  Victor,  ad  II.,  xiii.,  353. 

Platon.,  p.  xxvi.  6  j^.  #.  ^  Schol.  ad  Aristoph.,  Nub.,  97,  180. 

Pint.,  dm.,  15  ;  Schol.  ad  Aristid.,p.  515. 
Schol.  ad  Aristoph.,  Equ.it.,  528,  1288, 


212  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Knights  in  his  Maricas,1  and  taunts  him  with  the  further  indignity  of  jest 
ing  on  his  rival's  baldness.  The  number  of  the  plays  of  Eupolis  is  stat 
ed  by  Suidas  at  seventeen,  and  by  another  authority  at  fourteen.  The 
extant  titles  exceed  the  greater  of  these  numbers,  but  some  of  them  are 
very  doubtful.  The  fragments  of  Eupolis  have  been  edited  by  Runkel, 
Pherccratis  et  Eupolidis  Fragm.,  Lips.,  1829,  and  are  also  given  by  Meineke, 
Fragm.  Comic.  Graze.,  vol.  i.,  p.  158,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 

VI.  ARISTOPHANES  ('AptoTo^cw'Tjs),2  the  prince  of  the  old  comedy,  was 
born  about  B.C.  444,  and  probably  at  Athens.  His  father,  Philippus,  had 
possessions  in  JEgina,  and  may  originally  have  come  from  that  island, 
whence  a  question  arose  whether  Aristophanes  was  a  genuine  Atheni 
an  citizen.  His  enemy  Cleon  brought  against  him  more  than  one  accu 
sation  to  deprive  him  of  his  civic  rights,  but  without  success,  as,  indeed, 
they  were  merely  the  fruit  of  revenge  for  his  attacks  on  that  dema 
gogue.  He  had  three  sons,  Philippus,  Araros,  and  Nicostratus,  called 
also  by  some  Philetaerus,  but  of  his  private  history  we  know  nothing. 
He  probably  died  about  B.C.  380. 

The  comedies  of  Aristophanes  are  of  the  highest  historical  interest, 
containing,  as  they  do,  an  admirable  series  of  caricatures  on  the  leading 
men  of  the  day,  and  a  contemporary  commentary  on  the  evils  existing  at 
Athens.  Indeed,  the  caricature  is  the  only  feature  in  modern  social  life 
which  at  all  resembles  them.  Aristophanes  was  a  bold,  and  often  a  wise 
patriot.  He  had  the  strongest  affection  for  Athens,  and  longed  to  see 
her  restored  to  the  state  in  which  she  was  flourishing  in  the  previous 
generation,  and  almost  in  his  own  childhood,  before  Pericles  became  the 
head  of  the  government,  and  when  the  age  of  Miltiades  and  Aristides 
had  but  just  passed  away.  The  first  great  evil  of  his  own  time  against 
which  he  inveighs  is  the  Peloponnesian  war,  which  he  regards  as  the 
work  of  Pericles,  and  even  attributes  it3  to  his  fear  of  punishment  for 
having  connived  at  a  robbery  said  to  have  been  committed  by  Phidias  on 
the  statue  of  Minerva  in  the  Parthenon,  and  also  to  the  influence  of  As- 
pasia.4  To  this  fatal  war,  among  a  host  of  evils,  he  ascribes  the  influ 
ence  of  vulgar  demagogues  like  Cleon  at  Athens,  of  which  also  the  ex 
ample  was  set  by  the  more  refined  demagogism  of  Pericles.  Another 
great  object  of  his  indignation  was  the  recently  adopted  system  of  educa 
tion,  which  had  been  introduced  by  the  Sophists,  acting  on  the  speculative 
and  inquiring  turn  given  to  the  Athenian  mind  by  the  Ionian  and  Eleatic 
philosophers,  and  the  extraordinary  intellectual  development  of  the  age 
following  the  Persian  war.  The  new  theories  introduced  by  the  Sophists 
threatened  to  overthrow  the  foundations  of  morality,  by  making  persua 
sion,  and  not  truth,  the  object  of  man  in  his  intercourse  with  his  fellows, 
and  to  substitute  a  universal  skepticism  for  the  religious  creed  of  the 
people.  The  worst  effects  of  such  a  system  were  seen  in  Alcibiades, 
who  combined  all  the  elements  which  Aristophanes  most  disliked,  head 
ing  the  war  party  in  politics,  and  protecting  the  sophistical  school  in  phi 
losophy  and  also  in  literature.  Of  this  latte^  school,  the  literary  and 
poetical  sophists,  Euripides  was  the  chief,  whose  works  are  full  of  that 

>  Nub.,  544,  seqq.         3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  11.         3  Pax,  606.         *  Acharn.,  500. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  213 

which  contrasts  so  offensively  with  the  moral  dignity  of 
JEschylus  and  Sophocles,  and  for  which  Aristophanes  introduces  him  as 
sitting  aloft  to  write  his  tragedies.  In  the  comedy  of  the  Clouds,  how 
ever,  the  sophistical  principles  in  general  are  attacked  at  their  very 
source,  and  as  their  representative  he  selects  Socrates,  whom  he  depicts 
in  the  most  odious  light.  The  selection  of  Socrates  for  this  purpose  is 
doubtless  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  supposition  that  Aristophanes  ob 
served  the  great  philosopher  from  a  distance  only,  while  his  own  unphil- 
osophical  turn  of  mind  prevented  him  from  entering  into  Socrates'  mer 
its,  both  as  a  teacher  and  a  practicer  of  morality ;  and  also  by  the  fact 
that  Socrates  was  an  innovator,  the  friend  of  Euripides,  the  tutor  of  Al- 
cibiades,  and  pupil  of  Archelaus,  and  that  there  was  much  in  his  appear 
ance  and  habits  in  the  highest  degree  ludicrous.  The  philosopher  who 
wore  no  under-garments,  and  the  same  upper  robe  in  winter  and  sum 
mer,  who  generally  went  barefoot,  and  appears  to  have  possessed  one 
pair  of  dress-shoes  which  lasted  him  for  life,1  who  used  to  stand  for 
hours  in  a  public  place  in  a  fit  of  abstraction — to  say  nothing  of  his  snub- 
nose  and  extraordinary  figure  and  physiognomy — could  hardly  expect  to 
escape  the  license  of  the  old  comedy.  The  invariably  speculative  turn 
which  he  gave  to  the  conversation,  his  bare  acquiescence  in  the  stories 
of  Greek  mythology,  which  Aristophanes  would  think  it  dangerous  even 
to  subject  to  inquiry,2  had  certainly  produced  an  unfavorable  opinion  of 
Socrates  in  the  minds  of  many,  and  explain  his  being  set  down  by  Aris 
tophanes  as  an  arch-sophist,  and  represented  even  as  a  thief. 

Another  feature  of  the  times  was  the  excessive  love  for  litigation  at 
Athens,  the  consequent  importance  of  the  dicasts,  and  the  disgraceful 
abuse  of  their  power ;  all  of  which  are  made  by  Aristophanes  direct  ob 
jects  of  attack.  But,  though  he  saw  what  were  the  evils  of  the  times, 
he  had  not  wisdom  to  find  a  remedy  for  them,  except  the  hopeless  and 
undesirable  one  of  a  movement  backward ;  and  therefore,  though  wre  al 
low  him  to  have  been  honest  and  bold,  we  must  deny  him  the  epithet  of 
great. 

The  merits  of  Aristophanes  as  a  poet  and  humorist  can  not  be  fully 
understood  without  an  actual  study  of  his  works.  We  have  no  means 
of  comparing  him  with  his  rivals  Cratinus  and  Eupolis,  though  he  is  said 
to  have  tempered  their  bitterness,  and  given  to  comedy  additional  grace  ; 
but  to  have  been  surpassed  by  Eupolis  in  the  conduct  of  his  plots.3  Pla 
to  called  the  soul  of  Aristophanes  the  temple  of  the  Graces,  and  has  in 
troduced  him  into  his  Symposium.  His  works  contain  snatches  of  lyric 
poetry  which  are  quite  noble,  and  some  of  his  choruses,  particularly  one 
in  the  Knights,  in  which  the  horses  are  represented  as  rowing  triremes 
in  an  expedition  against  Corinth,  are  written  with  a  spirit  and  humor 
unrivalled  in  Greek,  and  are  not  very  dissimilar  to  English  ballads.  Ar 
istophanes  was  a  complete  master  of  the  Attic  dialect,  and  in  his  hands 
the  perfection  of  that  glorious  instrument  of  thought  is  wonderfully  shown. 
No  flights  are  too  bold  for  the  range  of  his  fancy :  animals  of  every  kind 

1  Bockh,  Public  Econ.  of  Athens,  vol.  i.,  p.  150.          2  Compare  Plat.,  Phaedr.,  p.  299. 
3  Platonius,  I.  c. 


214  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

are  pressed  into  his  service :  frogs  chaunt  choruses ;  a  dog  is  tried  for 
stealing  a  cheese  ;  and  an  iambic  verse  is  composed  of  the  squeakings  of 
a  pig.  Words  are  invented  of  a  length  which  must  have  made  the  speak 
ers  breathless. 

Suidas  tells  us  that  Aristophanes  was  the  author,  in  all,  of  fifty-foui 
plays.  Of  these  we  have  only  eleven  remaining.  In  the  year  B.C.  427, 
the  poet  brought  out  his  first  play,  entitled  AaiTaAels,  or  "  the  Feasters," 
which  gained  the  second  prize  of  the  contending  pieces.  His  chief  object 
in  this  play  was  to  censure  the  system  of  education  and  manners  then 
prevalent  at  Athens,  and  to  advocate  a  return  to  the  habits  of  former 
times.  In  it  he  held  up  to  public  contempt  the  character  of  the  spend 
thrift.  This  play  was  brought  out  in  the  name  of  Callistratus,  not  in  his 
own.  Some  have  thought  that  this  was  done  because  the  poet  was  un 
der  thirty  years  of  age,  and  because  an  express  law,  as  they  maintain, 
forbade  a  poet  to  exhibit  a  drama  in  his  own  name  while  he  was  under 
thirty.  But  Bergk  has  shown  that  such  a  law  is  a  mere  fiction  of  the 
commentators ;  for  ^Eschylus,  Sophocles,  and  Euripides  are  all  known 
to  have  brought  out  plays  in  their  own  name  while  they  were  under 
thirty.  The  true  reason  for  the  step  is  given  by  Aristophanes  himself 
in  the  parabasis  of  the  "  Knights,"1  where  he  states  that  he  had  pur 
sued  this  course,  not  from  want  of  thought,  but  from  a  sense  of  the  dif 
ficulty  of  his  profession,  and  from  a  fear  that  he  might  suffer  from  that 
fickleness  of  taste  which  the  Athenians  had  shown  toward  other  poets, 
as  Magnes,  Crates,  and  Cratinus.  It  was  the  dread  of  this  same  fickle 
ness  that  induced  him,  even  when  his  fame  was  established,  to  have  re 
course  to  the  same  expedient  in  the  case  of  many  of  his  other  plays.2 
The  ancient  grammarians  state  that  he  transferred  to  Callistratus  the 
political  dramas,  and  to  Philonides  those  which  belonged  to  private  life. 

The  next  year  he  brought  out  the  "  Babylonians,"  also  in  the  name  of 
Callistratus.  In  this  play  he  ridiculed  some  of  the  democratical  institu 
tions  of  Athens,  especially  the  system  of  appointing  to  office  by  lot,  and 
attacked  Cleon,  the  most  powerful  demagogue  of  the  day,  in  the  presence 
of  the  allies  and  foreign  ambassadors.  Cleon  brought  an  action,  not 
against  Callistratus,  in  whose  name  the  play  appeared,  but  against  Aris 
tophanes  himself,  on  the  ground  of  his  having  calumniated  the  govern 
ment  and  its  officers  in  the  presence  of  foreigners.  The  action  failed, 
and  the  poet  was  the  more  encouraged  to  pursue  the  course  he  had  be 
gun.  In  the  following  play,  the  "  Acharnians,"  B.C.  425,  again  exhibited 
by  Callistratus,  he  renewed  the  attack  upon  Cleon,  and  followed  up  the 
attack  subsequently  in  the  "  Knights." 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  extant  comedies  of  Aristophanes,  with 
the  year  in  which  they  were  performed:  1.  Acharnians,  B.C.  425.  Pro 
duced,  as  wre  have  said,  in  the  name  of  Callistratus.  It  gained  the  first 
prize.  The  poet  in  this  play  exhorts  his  countrymen  to  peace.  2.  Knights 
(or  Horsemen),  B.C.  424.  The  first  play  produced  in  the  name  of  Aris 
tophanes  himself.  It  gained  the  first  prize,  Cratinus  being  second.  This 

1  v.  514.     Compare  Nub.,  530. 

2  Compare  Bcrgk,  in  Meineke's  Pragm.  Com.  Grose.,  p.  939 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  215 

play,  as  just  remarked,  was  directed  against  Cleon,  whose  power  at  this 
time  was  so  great  that  no  one  was  bold  enough  to  make  a  mask  to  rep 
resent  his  features ;  so  that  Aristophanes  performed  the  character  him 
self,1  with  his  face  smeared  with  wine-lees.  3.  Clouds,  B.C.  423.  This 
play,  though  perhaps  its  author's  master-piece,  met  with  a  complete  fail 
ure  in  the  contest  for  prizes,  owing  probably  to  the  intrigues  of  Alcibia- 
des ;  nor  was  it  more  successful  when  altered  for  a  second  representa 
tion,  if  indeed  the  alterations  were  ever  completed,  which  Suvern  denies. 
The  play,  as  we  have  it,  contains  the  parabasis  of  the  second  edition.2 
4.  Wasps,  B.C.  422.3  This  is  a  pendant  to  the  Knights.  In  the  latter, 
the  poet  had  attacked  the  sovereign  assembly,  and  here  he  aims  his  bat 
tery  at  the  courts  of  justice,  the  other  strong-hold  of  party  violence  and 
the  power  of  demagogues.  It  gained  the  second  prize.  5.  Peace,  B.C. 
419.  Gained  the  second  prize,  Eupolis  carrying  off  the  first.  This  play 
is  a  return  to  the  subject  of  the  Acharnians.  6.  Birds,*  B.C.  414.  Gained 
the  second  prize,  Amipsias  being  first.  This  piece  is  intended  to  dis 
courage  the  disastrous  Sicilian  expedition.  7.  Lysistrataf  B.C.  411.  The 
old  subject  of  the  Peloponnesian  war.  8.  Thesmophoriazusa.  Exhibited 
during  the  oligarchy.  This  is  the  first  of  the  two  great  attacks  on  Eu 
ripides,  and  contains  some  inimitable  parodies  on  his  plays,  especially 
the  "Andromeda,"  which  had  just  appeared.  It  is  almost  wholly  free 
from  political  allusions.  9.  Plutus,  B.C.  408.  10.  Frogs,6  B.C.  405. 
Gained  the  first  prize,  Phrynichus  being  second,  and  Plato  third.  In  this 
play,  Bacchus  descends  to  Hades  in  search  of  a  tragic  poet — those  then 
alive  being  worthless — and  ^Eschylus  and  Euripides  contend  for  the  prize 
of  resuscitation.  Euripides  is  at  last  dismissed  by  a  parody  on  his  own 
famous  line,  fj  yXuxra'  o^w.uox',  f)  Se  fypty  O.VU/J.OTOS,  "  My  tongue  took  an 
oath,  but  my  mind  is  unsworn."  ^Eschylus  accompanies  Bacchus,  the 
tragic  throne  in  Hades  being  given  to  Sophocles  during  his  absence.  11. 
Ecclesiazusce,  B.C.  392.  Written  in  ridicule  of  the  political  theories  of 
Plato,  which  were  based  on  Spartan  institutions.  In  B.C.  388,  the  second 
edition  of  the  Plutus  appeared.  The  last  two  comedies  of  Aristophanes 
were  the  Molosicon  and  Cocalus,  produced  about  B.C.  387  (date  of  the 
peace  of  Antalcidas),  by  Araros,  one  of  his  sons.  They  are  both  lost. 

EDITIONS    OF    ARISTOPHANES. 

The  Editio  Princeps  of  Aristophanes  is  that  of  Aldus,  Venice,  1498,  published  without 
the  Lysistrata  and  Thesmophoriazusae.  Of  subsequent  editions  the  most  deserving  of 
mention  are,  that  of  Kuster,  Amsterdam,  1710,  fol. ;  that  of  Brunck,  Strasburg,  1783,  6 
vols.  8vo,  which  would  be  more  complete  did  it  contain  the  scholia ;  that  of  Invernizzi, 
completed  by  Beck  and  Dindorf,  13  vols.  8vo,  Lips.,  1794-1826  ;  that  of  Bekker,  5  vols. 
8vo,  London,  1829,  with  a  Latin  version,  the  scholia,  and  a  very  copious  but  ill-digested 
body  of  notes,  embracing  the  remarks  of  numerous  preceding  commentators ;  that  of 
Dindorf  (the  text  merely),  in  the  Poetae  Scenici  Grceci,  reprinted  at  Oxford,  with  the  addi- 

1  This,  however,  though  the  generally-received  account,  is  denied  by  Bergk,  I.  c. 

2  Bergk  (p.  913,  seq.)  thinks  it  probable  that  the  "  Clouds"  was  brought  out  in  the 
name  of  Philonides.  3  Brought  out  in  the  name  of  Philonides. 

*  Brought  out  in  the  name  of  Callistratus. 

5  Brought  out  in  the  name  of  Callistratus. 

6  Brought  out  in  the  name  of  Philonides. 


216  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

lion  of  the  scholia  and  a  commentary,  in  7  vols.  8vo  ;  that  of  Bothe,  4  vols.  8vo,  Lips., 
1828-1830,  forming  part  also  of  his  Poetcs  Scenici  Grteci  (vol.  v.-viii.) ;  that  of  Thiersch, 
Lips.,  1830,  &c.,  of  which  only  the  first  volume,  containing  extensive  prolegomena,  and 
the  comedy  of  the  Plutus,  and  the  first  part  of  the  sixth  volume,  containing  the  Ranae, 
have  appeared ;  that  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  with  a  revised  text  by  Dindorf,  and 
the  Scholia  by  Dubner,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1838-42;  and  a  new  edition  with  critical  text  by 
JEnger,  Bonn,  1844,  of  which  2  vols.,  the  Lysistrata  and  Thesmophoriazusas,  have  ap 
peared.  There  is  also  a  valuable  edition  by  Mitchell,  of  the  Acharnians,  Wasps,  Knights, 
Clouds,  and  Frogs,  with  English  notes,  5  vols.  8vo,  London,  1835-39,  and  he  has  also 
translated  the  Acharnians,  Wasps,  and  Knights,  with  great  ability,  into  English  verse. 
Of  editions  of  separate  plays  there  is  a  large  number,  among  which  we  may  particularly 
mention  that  of  the  Acharnians,  by  Elmsley,  London,  1830  ;  of  the  Wasps,  by  Conz, 
Tubing.,  1823 ;  of  the  Clouds,  by  Hermann,  Leipzig,  1830;  of  the  ThesmophoriazuscB,  and 
of  the  Ranee  by  Fritzsche,  the  former  at  Leipzig,  1838,  the  latter  at  Zurich,  1845  ;  of  the 
Plutus,  by  Hemsterhuis,  Harl.,  1744,  8vo  ;  of  the  same,  by  Dobree,  Lond.,  1820 ;  and  by 
Cookesley,  Lond.,  1834,  with  useful  notes  in  English ;  and  that  of  the  Birds  and  Frogs, 
by  Cookesley,  Lond.,  1834,  1837,  also  with  English  notes.  The  Essay  of  Silvern  on  the 
plot  of  the  Birds,  in  the  Transactions  of  the  Royal  Academy  of  Sciences  of  Berlin  (1827), 
and  translated  by  Hamilton,  is  well  worth  perusal.  A  copious  index  verborum  to  Aris 
tophanes,  by  Caravella,  was  issued  from  the  Clarendon  press,  Oxford,  1822. 

VII.  PHERECRATES1  (*e/?e/cpaT7js),  of  Athens,  was  contemporary  with  Cra- 
tinus,  Crates,  Eupolis,  Plato,  and  Aristophanes,  being  somewhat  younger 
than  the  first  two,  and  somewhat  older  than  the  others.     He  gained  his 
first  victory  B.C.  438,  and  he  imitated  the  style  of  Crates,  whose  actor  he 
had  been.2     Crates  and  Pherecrates  very  much  modified  the  coarse  satire 
and  vituperation  of  which  the  old  comedy  had  previously  been  the  vehicle, 
and  constructed  their  comedies  on  the  basis  of  a  regular  plot,  and  with 
more  dramatic  action.     Pherecrates  did  not,  however,  abstain  altogether 
from  personal  satire,  for  we  see  by  the  fragments  of  his  plays  that  he  at 
tacked  Alcibiades,  the  tragic  poet  Melanthius,  and  others.3     He  invented 
a  new  metre,  which  was  named  after  him  the  Pherecratean  or  Pherecratic, 
and  which  may  be  best  explained  as  a  choriambus,  with  a  spondee  for  its 
base,  and  a  long  syllable  for  its  termination.     The  metre  is  very  frequent 
in  the  choruses  of  the  Greek  tragedians,  and  in  Horace,  as,  for  example, 
Grata  Pyrrha  sub  antro.     The  extant  titles  of  his  plays  amount  to  eight 
een,  which  Meineke  reduces  to  fifteen.     The  fragments  of  Pherecrates 
are  given,  with  those  of  Eupolis,  by  Runkel,  and  also  by  Meineke,  Comic. 
Gr&c.  Fragm.,  vol.  i.,  p.  87,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 

VIII.  PLATO  (n^rcoj/),4  of  Athens,  one  of  the  chief  poets  of  the  old  com 
edy,  was  contemporary  with  Pherecrates  and  the  others  whom  we  have 
just  mentioned,  and  flourished  from  B.C.  428  to  389.     From  the  language 
of  the  grammarians,  and  from  the  large  number  of  fragments  which  are 
preserved,  it  is  evident  that  his  plays  were  only  second  in  popularity  to 
those  of  Aristophanes.     Purity  of  language,  refined  sharpness  of  wit,  and 
a  combination  of  the  vigor  of  the  old  comedy,  with  the  greater  elegance 
of  the  middle  and  the  new,  were  his  chief  characteristics.     Though  many 
of  his  plays  had  no  political  reference  at  all,  yet  it  is  evident  that  he  kept 
up  the  spirit  of  the  old  comedy  in  his  attacks  on  the  corruptions  and  cor 
rupt  persons  of  his  age.     Among  the  chief  objects  of  his  attacks  were  the 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biog.,  s.  v.  2  Anon.,  De  Com.,  p.  xxix. 

3  Athen.,  viii.,  p.  343,  C ;  xii.,  p.  538,  B.  *  Smith,  Diet.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  217 

demagogues  Cleon,  Hyperbolus,  Cleophon,  and  the  orators  Cephalus  and 
Archinus,  for,  like  Aristophanes,  he  regarded  the  art  of  rhetoric  as  one 
of  the  worst  sources  of  mischief  to  the  commonwealth.  Plato  seems  to 
have  been  one  of  the  most  diligent  of  the  old  comic  poets.  Suidas  gives 
the  titles  of  thirty  of  his  dramas,  to  which  number  another  is  to  be  added, 
not  mentioned  by  the  lexicographer.  The  fragments  of  Plato  are  given 
by  Cobet,  Amsterdam,  1840,  and  also  by  Meineke,  Comic.  Grac.  Frag., 
vol.  i.,  p.  357,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 

IX.  PHILONIDES  (SnAewST/s),  an  Athenian,  better  known  on  account 
of  his  connection  with  the  literary  history  of  Aristophanes  than  from  his 
comic  productions.  It  is  generally  stated  that  Philonides  was  an  actor 
of  Aristophanes,  who  is  said  to  have  committed  to  him  and  to  Callistra- 
tus  his  chief  characters ;  but  the  best  modern  critics  have  shown  that 
this  is  an  erroneous  statement,  and  that  the  true  state  of  the  case  is,  that 
several  of  the  plays  of  Aristophanes  were  brought  out  in  the  names  of 
Callistratus  and  Philonides.1  The  fragments  of  Philonides  are  given  by 
Meineke,  Comic.  Grac.  Frag*.,  vol.  i.,  p.  156,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD  —  continued. 
WRITERS    OF    SICILIAN    COMEDY. 

I.  WE  have  already  stated  that  comedy  was  earliest  brought  to  some 
thing  like  perfection  in  Sicily.     It  will  not  be  amiss,  therefore,  to  give  a 
brief  account  of  some  of  the  principal  comic  poets  of  the  Sicilian  school 
before  proceeding  to  the  writers  of  the  middle  and  new  comedy  of  the 
Athenians.     The  flourishing  period  of  Sicilian  comedy  was  that  in  which 
Phormis,  Epicharmus,  and  Dinolochus  wrote  for  the  stage.     To  these  may 
be  added,  though  not  coming  strictly  under  the  denomination  of  a  comic 
poet,  Sophron,  the  composer  of  Mimes. 

II.  PHORMIS  (*%us),2  less  correctly  PHORMUS  (fco'ftuos),3  came  originally 
from  Maenalus  in  Arcadia,  and,  having  removed  to  Sicily,  became  intimate 
with  Gelon,  whose  children  he  educated.     He  distinguished  himself  as  a 
soldier,  both  under  Gelon  and  Hiero  his  brother,  who  succeeded  B.C.  478. 
Though  the  matter  has  been  called  in  question,  there  seems  to  be  little  or 
no  doubt  that  this  is  the  same  person  who  is  associated  by  Aristotle  with 
Epicharmus  as  one  of  the  originators  of  comedy,  or  of  a  particular  form 
of  it.     We  have  the  names  of  eight  comedies  written  by  him,  in  Suidas, 
who  also  states  that  he  was  the  first  to  introduce  actors  with  robes 
reaching  to  the  ankles,  and  to  ornament  the  stage  with  skins  dyed  pur 
ple — as  drapery,  it  may  be  presumed.     From  the  titles  of  the  plays,  we 
may  safely  infer  that  he  selected  the  same  mythological  subjects  as  Epi 
charmus.4 

1  Smith,  Diet.,  s.  v.  Philonides. 

2  Aristot.;  Pausan.    Bentley  is  in  favor  of  this  as  the  more  correct  form.    Phal.,  vol. 
i.,  p.  252,  ed.  Dycc.  3  Athen. ;  Suid.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Bioffr.,  s.  v. 

K 


218  « i  R  E  K  If     L  1  T  K  R  A  T  f  R  K . 

III.  EPICHARMUS  ('ETri'xa/^os),  the  chief  comic  poet  among  the  Dorians, 
was  born  in  the  island  of  Cos,  about  B.C.  540.  At  the  age  of  three  months, 
he  was  carried  to  Megara,  in  Sicily,  or,  according  to  the  account  pre 
served  by  Suidas,  he  went  thither  at  a  much  later  period,  with  Cadmus, 
the  tyrant  of  Cos,  when  the  latter  resigned  his  power  and  emigrated  to 
that  island,  about  B.C.  488.  Thence  he  removed  to  Syracuse,  with  the 
other  inhabitants  of  Megara,  when  the  latter  city  was  destroyed  by  Ge- 
lon  (B.C.  484  or  483).  Here  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life,  which 
was  prolonged  throughout  the  reign  of  Hiero,  at  whose  court  Epicharmus 
associated  with  the  other  great  writers  of  the  time,  and  among  them  with 
^Eschylus,  who  seems  to  have  had  some  influence  on  his  dramatic  course.1 
He  died  at  the  age  of  ninety  (B.C.  450),  or,  according  to  Lucian,2  ninety- 
seven  (B.C.  443).  Epicharmus  was  a  Pythagorean  philosopher,  and  spent 
the  earlier  part  of  his  life  in  the  study  of  philosophy,  both  physical  and 
metaphysical.  He  is  said  to  have  followed  for  some  time  his  father's  pro 
fession  of  medicine,  and  it  appears  that  he  did  not  commence  writing 
comedies  until  his  removal  to  Syracuse.3 

Comedy,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  had  for  some  time  existed  at 
Megara  in  Sicily,  which  was  a  colony  from  Megara,  near  the  isthmus  of 
Corinth,  the  latter  of  which  two  towns  disputed,  it  will  be  remembered, 
with  the  Athenians  the  invention  of  comedy.  But  the  comedy  at  the 
Sicilian  Megara,  before  Epicharmus,  seems  to  have  been  little  more  than 
a  low  buffoonery.  It  was  he,  together  with  Phormis,  who  gave  it  a  new 
character,  and  introduced  a  regular  plot.  The  number  of  his  comedies 
is  differently  stated  at  52  or  at  35.  There  are  still  extant  thirty-five  titles. 
The  majority  of  them  refer  to  mythological  subjects,  that  is,  travesties 
of  the  heroic  myths,  and  these  plays  no  doubt  very  much  resembled  the 
satyric  dramas  of  the  Athenians.  But,  besides  mythology,  Epicharmus 
wrote  pieces  on  othei  subjects,  political  and  moral,  relating  to  manners 
and  customs,  and,  it  would  seem,  even  to  personal  character.  Those, 
however,  of  his  comedies  which  belong  to  the  last  head  are  rather  general 
than  individual,  and  resembled  the  writings  of  the  new  comedy,  so  that 
when  the  ancient  writers  enumerated  him  among  the  poets  of  the  old 
comedy,  they  must  be  understood  as  referring  rather  to  his  antiquity  in 
point  of  time,  than  to  any  close  resemblance  between  his  works  and  those 
of  the  old  Attic  comedians.  A  considerable  number  of  fragments  remain.4 
Miiller  has  observed  that  the  painted  vases  of  Lower  Italy  often  enable 
us  to  gain  a  complete  and  vivid  idea  of  those  theatrical  representations 
of  which  the  plays  of  Epicharmus  are  the  type. 

The  style  of  his  pieces  appears  to  have  been  a  curious  mixture  of  the 
broad  buffoonery  which  distinguished  the  old  Megarian  comedy,  and  of 
the  sententious  wisdom  of  the  Pythagorean  philosopher.  His  language 
was  remarkably  elegant ;  he  was  celebrated  for  his  choice  epithets  ;  his 
plays  abounded,  as  the  extant  fragments  prove,  with  yvu/j-ai,  or  philosoph 
ical  and  moral  maxims,  and  long  speculative  discourses,  on  the  instinct 
of  animals,  for  example.  In  proof  of  the  high  estimation  in  which  he  was 
held  by  the  ancients,  it  may  be  enough  to  refer  to  the  notices  of  him  by 

i   Diof.  Laert.,  viii.,  78.  »  Marrob.,  25.  3  Smith,  Diet.,  s.  v.  ~Id^T 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  219 

Plato  and  Cicero.  It  is  singular,  however,  that  he  had  no  successor  in 
his  peculiar  style  of  comedy,  except  his  son  or  disciple  Dinolochus.  He 
had,  however,  distinguished  imitators  in  other  times  and  countries.  Plaut- 
us,  for  instance,  is  said  by  Horace  to  have  made  him  his  model,  "  Plaut- 
us  ad  exemplar  Siculi  properare  Epicharmi."1  The  parasite,  wrhich  forms 
so  conspicuous  a  character  in  the  plays  of  the  new  comedy,  is  first  found 
in  Epicharmus. 

The  fragments  of  Epicharmus  are  printed  in  the  collections,  of  Morel- 
lius,  Sententia  Vet.  Comic.,  Paris,  1553,  8vo ;  of  Hertelius,  Collect.  Frag. 
Comic.,  Basil.,  1560,  8vo  ;  of  H.  Stephens,  Poesis  Philosophica,  1573,  8vo  ; 
of  Grotius,  Excerpt,  ex  Trag.  et  Com.,  Paris,  1626,  4to ;  by  Ahrens,  in  his 
De  Lingua  Graca  Dialectis,  vol.  ii.,  p.  435,  seqq. ;  and  separately  by  Kruse- 
man,  Harlem,  1834.  Additions  have  been  made  by  Welcker  (Zeitschrifi 
fur  die  Alterthumsw.,  1835,  p.  1 123)  and  others.  The  most  important  mod 
ern  work  on  Epicharmus  is  that  of  Grysar,  De  Doriensium  Com&dia,  Colon., 
1828.  The  second  volume,  however,  containing  the  fragments,  has  nev 
er  appeared. 

IV.  DINOLOCHUS  ( AetvJAoxos ),  of  Syracuse  or  Agrigentum,  was,  ac 
cording  to  some,  the  son,  according  to  others,  the  disciple  of  Epicharmus. 
He  lived  about  B.C.  488,  and  wrote  fourteen  plays  in  the  Doric  dialect, 
about  which  we  only  know,  from  a  few  titles,  that  some  of  them  were  on 
mythological  subjects.2 

V.  SOPHRON  (S^pwj/),3  of  Syracuse,  was  the  principal  writer,  and,  in  one 
sense,  the  inventor  of  that  species  of  composition  called  the  Mime  (ju^os), 
which  was  one  of  the  numerous  varieties  of  the  Dorian  comedy.     He 
flourished  about  B.C.  460-420.     When  Sophron  is  called  the  inventor  of 
mimes,  the  meaning  is,  that  he  reduced  to  the  form  of  a  literary  compo 
sition  a  species  of  amusement,  which  the  Greeks  of  Sicily,  who  were  pre 
eminent  for  broad  humor  and  merriment,  had  practiced  from  time  imme 
morial  at  their  public  festivals.     Whether  the  term  juntos  originally  in 
cluded  any  kind  of  imitation  without  wrords,  wre  are  not  sufficiently  in 
formed  ;  but  it  is  clear  that  the  mimes  of  Sophron  were  ethical,  that  is, 
they  exhibited  not  only  incident,  but  characters.     Moreover,  as  is  implied 
in  the  very  fact  of  their  being  a  literary  composition,  words  were  pat  into 
the  mouths  of  the  actors,  though  still  quite  in  subordination  to  their  ges 
tures  ;  and  in  proportion  as  the  spoken  part  of  the  performance  was  in 
creased,  the  mime  would  approach  nearer  and  nearer  to  a  comedy.     Of  all 
such  representations  instrumental  music  appears  to  have  formed  an  es 
sential  part. 

One  feature  of  the  mimes  of  Sophron,  which  formed  a  marked  distinc 
tion  between  them  and  comic  poetry,  was  the  nature  of  their  rhythm. 
There  is  some  difficulty,  however,  in  determining  whether  they  were  in 
mere  prose,  or  in  mingled  poetry  and  prose,  or  in  prose  with  a  peculiar 
rhythmical  movement,  but  no  metrical  arrangement.  Suidas  expressly 
states  that  they  were  in  prose  (KaraXoyd^v)  ;*  and  the  existing  frag 
ments  confirm  the  general  truth  of  this  assertion,  for  they  defy  all  at- 

1  Epist.,  ii.,  1,  58.  2  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Grysar,  De  Dor.  Com.,  p.  81. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Suid.,  s.  v. 


220  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

tempts  at  scansion.  Nevertheless,  they  frequently  fall  into  a  sort  of 
rhythmical  cadence  or  swing,  which  is  different  from  the  rhythm  of  or 
dinary  prose.1  This  prosaic  structure  of  the  mimes  of  Sophron  has  given 
rise  to  a  douht  whether  they  were  ever  intended  for  public  exhibition,  a 
doubt  which  ought  never  to  have  been  entertained.  The  dialect  of  So 
phron  is  the  old  Doric,  interspersed  with  Sicilian  peculiarities.  The  char 
acter  of  these  compositions,  as  we  have  said  above,  appears  to  have  been 
ethical ;  that  is,  the  scenes  represented  were  those  of  ordinary  life,  and 
the  language  employed  was  intended  to  bring  out  more  clearly  the  char 
acters  of  the  persons  exhibited  in  those  scenes,  not  only  for  the  amuse 
ment,  but  also  for  the  instruction  of  the  spectators.  Plato  was  a  great 
admirer  of  Sophron,  a  fact  which  shows  that  there  must  have  been  some 
thing  of  sound  philosophy  in  these  productions,  and  he  is  said  to  have 
been  the  first  who  made  the  mimes  known  at  Athens.  The  serious  pur 
pose  which  was  aimed  at  in  the  works  of  Sophron,  was  always,  as  in  the 
Attic  comedy,  clothed  under  a  sportive  form ;  and  it  can  easily  be  imag 
ined  that  sometimes  the  latter  element  prevailed  even  to  the  extent  of 
grossness,  as  some  of  the  extant  fragments  and  the  parallel  of  the  Attic 
comedy  combine  to  prove.2  The  best  collection  of  the  fragments  of  So 
phron  is  by  Ahrens,  De  Gracce  Lingua.  Dialectis.  They  have  also  been 
collected  by  Blomfield,  in  the  Classical  Journal  for  1811,  No.  8,  p.  380,  seqq., 
and  more  fully  in  the  Museum  Criticum,  vol.  ii.,  p.  340,  seqq.,  Cambridge, 
1826. 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD—  continued. 

WRITERS     OF     THE     MIDDLE     COMEDY. 

I.  EUBULUS  (Eu£ouAos)  was  a  very  distinguished  poet  of  the  middle  com 
edy,  and  flourished  about  B.C.  376.     His  plays  were  chiefly  on  mytholog 
ical  subjects.     Several  of  them  contained  parodies  of  passages  from  the 
tragic  poets,  and  especially  from  Euripides.     There  are  a  few  instances 
of  his  attacking  eminent  individuals  by  name,  as  Philocrates,  Cydias,  Cal- 
limedon,  Dionysius  the  tyrant  of  Syracuse,  and  Callistratus.     He  some 
times  ridiculed  classes  of  persons,  as  the  Thebans  in  his  'Ajmthnj.     His 
language  is  simple  and  elegant,  and  generally  pure,  containing  few  words 
which  are  not  found  in  writers  of  the  best  period.     Like  Antiphanes,  he 
was  extensively  pillaged  by  later  poets,  as,  for  example,  by  Alexis,  Ophe- 
lion,  and  Ephippus.     Suidas  gives  the  number  of  his  plays  at  104,  of  which 
there  are  extant  more  than  50  titles.3    The  fragments  of  Eubulus  are 
given  by  Meineke,  Comic.  Gr<zc.  Frag.,  vol.  i.,  p.  594,  scqq.,  ed.  min. 

II.  ARAROS  ('Apapds),  son  of  Aristophanes,  was  first  introduced  to  pub 
lic  notice  by  his  father  as  the  principal  actor  in  the  second  Plutus, 
B.C.  388,  the  last  play  which  Aristophanes  exhibited  in  his  own  name. 
The  father  wrote  two  more  comedies,  the  K^/caAos  and  the 


1  Hcrm.  ad  Aristot.,  PiJet.,  i.,  8.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Ttto^r.,  .<?.  v.  3  Id.  ib. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  221 

which  were  brought  out  in  the  name  of  Araros,1  probably  very  soon  after 
the  above  date.  Araros  first  exhibited  in  his  own  name,  B.C.  375. 2  He 
is  charged  with  frigidity  by  Alexis,3  who,  however,  was  his  rival.  Suidas 
mentions  six  comedies  of  his.  The  fragments  are  given  in  Meineke, 
Comic.  Grac.  Frag.,  vol.  i.,  p.  630,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 

III.  ANAXANDRIDES  ('Ava£av8pi8r]s)  was  the  son  of  Anaxander,  a  native 
of  Camirus,  in  Rhodes.     He  began  to  exhibit  comedies  in  B.C.  376,  and 
29  years  later  he  was  present,  and  probably  exhibited  at  the  games  cele 
brated  by  Philip  at  Dium.     Aristotle  held  him  in  high  esteem.*    He  is 
said  to  have  been  the  first  poet  who  made  love-intrigues  a  prominent  part 
of  comedy.     He  gained  ten  prizes,  the  whole  number  of  his  comedies  be 
ing  sixty-five.     Though  he  is  said  to  have  destroyed  several  of  his  plays 
in  anger  at  their  rejection,  we  still  have  the  titles  of  thirty-three.5    The 
fragments  are  given  by  Meineke,  Frag.  Comic.  Grcec.,  vol.  i.,  p.  574,  seqq., 
ed.  min. 

IV.  ANTIPHANES  ^h.vTifyd.vt]s)  was  the  most  highly-esteemed  writer  of  the 
middle  comedy,  excepting  Alexis,  who  shared  that  honor  with  him.     He 
was  born  about  B.C.  404,  and  died  B.C.  330.     The  parentage  and  birth 
place  of  Antiphanes  are  doubtful.     As  his  birth-place  are  mentioned  Cios 
on  the  Propontis,  Smyrna,  Rhodes,  and  Larissa ;  but  the  last  statement 
deserves  little  credit.6     The  fragments  which  remain  of  his  pieces  prove 
that  Athenaeus  was  right  in  praising  him  for  the  elegance  of  his  language, 
though  he  uses  some  words  and  phrases  which  are  not  found  in  older 
writers.     He  was  one  of  the  most  fertile  dramatic  authors  that  ever  lived, 
for  his  plays  amounted,  on  the  largest  computation,  to  365,  on  the  least 
to  260.     We  still  possess  the  titles  of  about  130.     It  is  probable,  however, 
that  some  of  the  comedies  ascribed  to  him  were  by  other  writers,  for  the 
grammarians  frequently  confound  him  with  other  comic  poets.     Some  of 
his  plays  were  on  mythological  subjects,  others  had  reference  to  particu 
lar  persons,  others  to  characters,  personal,  professional,  and  national, 
while  others  seem  to  have  been  wholly  occupied  with  the  intrigues  of 
private  life.7     The  fragments  of  Antiphanes  are  given  by  Meineke,  Frag. 
Comic.  GrcEC.,  vol.  i.,  p.  491,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 

V.  NICOSTRATUS  (Nt/ccWparos),  the  youngest  of  the  three  sons  of  Aris 
tophanes,  called  by  some  Philetarus.     He  is  ranked  by  Athenaeus  express 
ly  among  the  poets  of  the  middle  comedy,8  though  some  of  his  pieces,  as, 
for  instance,  the  'OpviQevr-fis,  belonged  rather  to  the  new  comedy.     Some 
of  the  characters  also  which  he  introduced  in  other  dramas  demonstrate 
the  same.     In  his  BacnAeTs,  he  introduced  a  boasting  soldier  ;9  in  his  TOK- 
IO-T^S,  an  avaricious  money-lender,  and  a  vaunting  cook.     Photius  has 
got  a  story  that  Nicostratus,  through  unrequited  love,  leaped  off  the  Leu- 
cadian  rock.     The  titles  of  nineteen  of  his  plays  have  come  down  to  us.10 
The  fragments  are  given  by  Meineke,  Frag.  Comic.  Grac.,  vol.  i.,  p.  632, 
seqq.,  ed.  min. 

1  Arg.  ail  Pint.,  iv.,  Bekker.  *  Suid.,  s.  v.  3  Athen.,  iii.,  p.  123,  E. 

*  Rhct.,  iii.,  10,  seqq.;  Eth.  Nicom.,  vii.,  10.  5  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

6  Meineke,  i.,  308.  i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  »  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  597,  /). 

1J  Id.,  vi.,  p.  230,  D.         10  smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


222  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

VI.  ALEXIS  (*A\e£is)  was  a  native  of  Thurii,  in  Magna  Graecia,  but  ad 
mitted  subsequently  to  the  privileges  of  an  Athenian  citizen.  He  was 
the  uncle  and  instructor  of  Menander,1-  was  born  about  B.C.  394,  and  lived 
to  the  age  of  106. 3  He  appears  to  have  been  rather  addicted  to  the 
pleasures  of  the  table.3  According  to  Plutarch,  he  expired  upon  the 
stage  while  being  crowned  as  victor.4  By  the  old  grammarians  he  is 
commonly  called  a  writer  of  the  middle  comedy,  and  fragments  and  titles 
of  many  of  his  plays  confirm  this  statement.  Still,  for  more  than  thirty 
years,  he  was  contemporary  with  Philippides,  Philemon,  Menander,  and 
Diphilus,  and  several  fragments  show  that  he  also  wrote  pieces  which 
would  be  classed  with  those  of  the  new  comedy.  He  was  a  remarkably 
prolific  writer.  Suidas  says  he  wrote  245  plays,  and  the  titles  of  113 
have  come  down  to  us.  In  some  of  his  pieces  he  ridiculed  Plato,  in  oth 
ers  he  satirized  Demosthenes.  As  might  have  been  expected  in  a  person 
who  wrote  so  much,  the  same  passage  frequently  occurred  in  several 
plays  ;  nor  did  he  scruple  sometimes  to  borrow  from  other  poets,  as,  foi 
example,  from  Eubulus.  His  Avit  and  elegance  are  praised  by  Athenaeus,5 
whose  testimony  is  confirmed  by  the  extant  fragments.  His  plays  were 
frequently  translated  by  the  Roman  writers.6  A  considerable  list  of  pe 
culiar  words  and  forms  employed  by  him  is  furnished  by  Meineke,7  who 
has  also  given  the  fragments  of  his  pieces,  Frag.  Comic.  Grcec.,  vol.  ii., 
p.  688,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD—  continued. 
WRITERS     OF     THE     NEW     COMEDY. 

I.  PHILIPPIDES  (&i\nnriST)s),  of  Athens,  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the  six 
principal  poets  of  the  new  comedy,  these  six  being  Philemon,  Menander, 
Diphilus,  Philippides,  Posidippus,  and  Apollodorus.     He  flourished  about 
B.C.  335.     Philippides  seems  to  have  deserved  the  rank  assigned  him,  as 
one  of  the  best  poets  of  the  new  comedy.     He  attacked  the  luxury  and 
corruption  of  the  age,  defended  the  privileges  of  his  art,  and  made  use  of 
personal  satire  with  a  spirit  approaching  to  that  of  the  old  comedy.8 
Plutarch  eulogizes  him  highly.9     His  death  is  said  to  have  been  caused 
by  excessive  joy  at  an  unexpected  victory.     It  appears  from  Gellius  that 
he  lived  to  an  advanced  age.     The  number  of  his  dramas  is  stated  by 
Suidas  at  forty-five  ;  there  are  fifteen  titles  extant.     Some  of  the  ancient 
critics  charge  Philippides  with  infringing  upon  the  purity  of  the  Attic  di 
alect,  and  Meineke  produces  several  words  from  his  fragments  as  exam 
ples.     The  fragments  are  given  by  the  scholar  just  mentioned,  Frag. 
Comic.  Gr&c.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  1116,  seqq.,  ed.  min.10 

II.  PHILEMON  (fciA./j/Aew),11  one  of  the  most  eminent  poets  of  the  new 


1  Suid.,  s.  v.  2  Plut.,  Defect.  Orac.,  p.  420,  E.  3  Athen.,  viii.,  p.  344. 

*  An  sen.  ger.  resp.,  p.  785,  B.  5  Athen.,  ii.,  p.  59,  F.  6  Aul.  Cell.,  ii.,  23. 

7  Meineke,  Fragm.  Com.,  vol.  i..  p.  374,  seqq.  8  Id.,  Hist.  Crit.,  p.  437,  seqq. 

9  Plut.,  Dcmttr.,  12.  I0  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr..  s.  r.  ll   lit.  ib. 


A  T  T  1C      P  p;  R  I  O  D.  223 

comedy,  ranking  next  to  Menander.  He  was  the  son  of  Damon,  and  a 
native  of  Soli,  in  Cilicia  ;  or,  according  to  some,  of  Syracuse.  He  came 
to  Athens  at  an  early  age,  and  there  subsequently  received  the  rights  of 
citizenship.  He  flourished  in  the  reign  of  Alexander,  a  little  earlier  than 
Menander,  whom,  however,  he  long  survived,  having  lived  nearly  100 
years.  The  manner  of  his  death  is  differently  related ;  some  ascribing 
it  to  excessive  laughter  at  a  ludicrous  incident,1  others  to  joy  at  ob 
taining  a  victory  in  a  dramatic  contest  ;2  while  another  story  represents 
him  as  quietly  called  away  by  the  goddesses,  whom  he  served,  in  the 
midst  of  the  composition  or  representation  of  his  last  and  best  work. 
Philemon  is  regarded  by  some  modern  scholars  as  the  first  poet  of  the 
new  comedy  in  order  of  time,  a  place,  however,  which  we  have  preferred, 
with  others,  assigning  to  Philippides.  Although  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  Philemon  was  inferior  to  Menander  as  a  poet,  yet  he  was  a  greater 
favorite  with  the  Athenians,  and  often  conquered  his  rival  in  the  dramat 
ic  contests.3  Gellius  ascribes  these  victories  to  the  use  of  unfair  influ 
ence,  and  tells  us  that  Menander  was  accustomed  to  ask  Philemon  him 
self  whether  he  did  not  blush  when  he  conquered  him.  We  have  other 
proofs  of  the  rivalry  between  Menander  and  Philemon  in  the  identity  of 
some  of  their  titles. 

Philemon  was,  however,  sometimes  defeated  ;  and  it  would  seem  that 
on  one  such  occasion  he  went  into  exile  for  a  time.*  At  all  events,  he 
undertook  a  journey  to  the  East,  either  from  this  cause  or  by  the  de 
sire  of  King  Ptolemy,  who  appears  to  have  invited  him  to  Alexandrea ; 
and  to  this  journey  ought,  no  doubt,  to  be  referred  his  adventure  with 
Magas,  tyrant  of  Gyrene,  the  brother  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus.  Philemon 
had  ridiculed  Magas  for  his  want  of  learning,  in  a  comedy,  copies  of  which 
he  took  pains  to  circulate  ;  and  the  arrival  of  the  poet  at  Gyrene,  whith 
er  he  was  driven  by  a  storm,  furnished  the  king  with  an  opportunity  of 
taking  a  contemptuous  revenge,  by  ordering  a  soldier  to  touch  the  poet's 
throat  with  a  naked  sword,  and  then  to  retire  politely  without  hurting 
him ;  after  which  he  made  him  a  present  of  a  set  of  child's  playthings, 
and  then  dismissed  him.5 

Philemon  seems  to  have  been  inferior  to  Menander  in  the  liveliness  of 
his  dialogue,  for  his  plays  were  considered,  on  account  of  their  more  con 
nected  arguments  and  longer  periods,  better  fitted  for  reading  than  for 
acting.6  The  extant  fragments  display  much  liveliness,  wit,  elegance, 
and  practical  knowledge  of  life.  His  favorite  subjects  seem  to  have 
been  love-intrigues,  and  his  characters  were  the  standing  ones  of  the  new 
comedy,  with  which  Plautus  and  Terence  have  made  us  familiar.  The 
jest  upon  Magas,  already  mentioned,  is  a  proof  that  the  personal  satire 
which  formed  the  chief  characteristic  of  the  old  comedy  was  not  entirely 
relinquished  in  the  new.  The  number  of  Philemon's  plays  was  ninety- 
seven.  The  extant  titles,  after  the  doubtful  and  spurious  ones  are  re 
jected,  amount  to  about  fifty-three ;  but  it  is  very  probable  that  some  of 

1  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Val.  Max.,  ix.,  12,  extr.  6.  2  pfat.  an  Sen.,  &c.,  p.  785,  B. 

3  Aul.  Gell.,  xvii.,  4.  *  Stob.,  Serm.,  xxxviii.,  p.  232. 

•  Pint .,  7>e  cohib.  ira,  p.  458,  A.  «  Demetr.  PhaL,  DeEloc..  t>  193. 


224  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

them  should  be  assigned  to  the  younger  Philemon.1  The  fragments  of 
Philemon  are  printed,  with  those  of  Menander,  by  Meineke,  Berlin,  1823, 
8vo,  and  in  his  Frag.  Comic.  Grcec.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  821,  seqq.,  ed.  min.  They 
are  given  also  by  Diibner,  at  the  end  of  the  Aristophanes  in  Didot's  Bib- 
liotheca  Gr<zca,  Paris,  1839.  (Cf.  editions  of  Menander  on  p.  226.) 

III.  MENANDER  (MeVtwfyos),2  of  Athens,  the  most  distinguished  poet  of 
the  new  comedy,  was  born  B.C.  342,  and  flourished  in  the  time  of  the 
successors  of  Alexander.  His  father,  Diopithes,  commanded  the  Athe 
nian  forces  on  the  Hellespont  in  the  year  of  his  son's  birth.  Alexis,  the 
comic  poet,  was  the  uncle  of  Menander,  on  the  father's  side ;  and  we 
may  naturally  suppose  that  the  young  Menander  derived  from  his  uncle 
his  taste  for  the  comic  drama,  and  was  instructed  by  him  in  its  rules  of 
composition.  His  character  must  have  been  greatly  influenced  and  formed 
by  his  intimacy  with  Theophrastus  and  Epicurus,  of  whom  the  former 
was  his  teacher  and  the  latter  his  intimate  friend.  His  taste  and  sym 
pathies  were  altogether  with  the  philosophy  of  Epicurus  ;  and  in  an  epi 
gram  he  declared  that  "  as  Themistocles  rescued  Greece  from  slavery,  so 
did  Epicurus  from  unreason."3  From  Theophrastus,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  must  have  derived  much  of  that  skill  in  the  discrimination  of  charac 
ter  which  we  so  much  admire  in  the  Xapatcrripes  of  the  philosopher,  and 
which  formed  the  great  charm  of  the  comedies  of  Menander.  His  mas 
ter's  attention  to  external  elegance  and  comfort  he  not  only  imitated, 
but,  as  was  natural  in  a  man  of  an  elegant  person,  a  joyous  spirit,  and  a 
serene  and  easy  temper,  he  carried  it  to  the  extreme  of  luxury  and  ef 
feminacy.  The  moral  character  of  Menander  is  defended  by  modern 
writers  against  the  aspersions  of  Suidas  and  others.  Thus  much  is  cer 
tain,  that  his  comedies  contain  nothing  offensive,  at  least  to  the  taste  of 
his  own  and  the  following  ages,  none  of  the  purest,  it  must  be  admitted, 
as  they  were  frequently  acted  at  private  banquets. 

Of  the  actual  events  of  Menander's  life  we  know  but  little.  He  en 
joyed  the  friendship  of  Demetrius  Phalereus,  whose  attention  was  first 
drawn  to  him  by  admiration  of  his  works.*  This  intimacy  was  attended, 
however,  with  danger  as  well  as  with  honor,  for  when  Demetrius  Phale 
reus  was  expelled  from  Athens  by  Demetrius  Poliorcetes,  Menander  be 
came  a  mark  for  the  public  informers,  and  would  have  been  put  to  death 
but  for  the  intercession  of  Telesphorus,  the  son-in-law  of  Demetrius.6 
The  first  Greek  king  of  Egypt,  Ptolemy,  the  son  of  Lagus,  was  also  one 
of  his  admirers  ;  and  he  invited  the  poet  to  his  court  at  Alexandrea  ;  but 
Menander  seems  to  have  declined  the  proffered  honor.6  Suidas  mentions 
some  letters  to  Ptolemy  as  among  the  works  of  Menander. 

The  time  of  his  death  is  differently  stated.  The  same  inscription  which 
gives  the  date  of  his  birth,  adds  that  he  died  at  the  age  of  fifty-two  years, 
in  the  archonship  of  Philippus,  in  the  thirty-second  year  of  Ptolemy  Soter. 
Clinton  shows  that  these  statements  refer  to  the  year  B.C.  292-1 ;  but  to 
make  up  the  fifty-two  years,  we  must  reckon  in  both  extremes,  342  and 
291.  The  date  is  confirmed  by  Eusebius.  by  the  anonymous  writer  on 

i  Smith,  Diet..  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  IiL  u.  3  Anth.  PaL,  Vii.,  72. 

*  Phaedrus,  i.,  11.  5  Diag.  Laert.,  v.,  80.  6  Plin.,  H.  N.,  vii.,  29. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  225 

comedy,  who  adds  that  Menander  died  at  Athens ;  by  Apollodorus  ;l  and 
by  Aulus  Gellius.2  Respecting  the  manner  of  his  death,  all  that  we  know 
is  that  an  old  commentator  on  Ovid3  applies  the  line  "  Comicus  ut  mediis 
periit  dum  nabat  in  undis"  to  Menander,  and  tells  us  that  he  was  drowned 
while  swimming  in  the  harbor  of  Piraeeus,  and  we  learn  from  Alciphron* 
that  Menander  had  an  estate  at  that  place.  He  was  buried  by  the  road 
leading  out  of  Piraeeus  toward  Athens.  There  are  two  epigrams  upon 
him  in  the  Greek  Anthology. 

Notwithstanding  Menander's  fame  as  a  poet,  his  public  dramatic  ca 
reer,  during  his  lifetime,  was  not  eminently  successful ;  for,  though  he 
composed  upward  of  a  hundred  comedies,  he  gained  the  prize  only  eight 
times.5  His  preference  for  elegant  exhibitions  of  character  above  coarse 
jesting  may  have  been  the  reason  why  he  was  not  so  great  a  favorite 
with  the  common  people  as  his  principal  rival,  Philemon,  who  is  said, 
moreover,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  to  have  used  unfair  means  of 
gaining  popularity.6  Menander  appears,  however,  to  have  borne  the  pop 
ular  neglect  very  lightly,  in  the  consciousness  of  his  own  superiority. 
The  Athenians  erected  his  statue  in  the  theatre  ;  but  this  was  an  honor 
too  often  conferred  upon  very  indifferent  poets  to  be  of  much  value  :  in 
deed,  according  to  Pausanias,  he  was  the  only  distinguished  comic  poet 
of  all  whose  statues  had  a  place  there.7  The  neglect  of  Menander's  con 
temporaries,  however,  has  been  amply  compensated  by  his  posthumous 
fame.  His  comedies  retained  their  place  on  the  stage  down  to  the  time 
of  Plutarch,8  and  the  unanimous  consent  of  antiquity  placed  him  at  the 
head  of  the  new  comedy,  and  on  an  equality  with  the  great  masters  of 
the  various  kinds  of  poetry.  The  grammarian  Aristophanes  assigned  him 
the  second  place  among  all  writers,  after  Homer  alone  ;9  and  to  the  same 
grammarian  is  ascribed  the  happy  saying,  *fl  MeVavfye,  /cal  flfe,  Tnfrepos  &p 
6pwv  Trp6Tcpov  fyifdiffarro  ;10  "0  Menander  and  life,  which  one  of  you,  pray, 
first  imitated  (the  other)  1"  Among  the  Romans,  besides  the  fact  that 
their  comedy  was  founded  chiefly  on  the  plays  of  Menander,  we  have  the 
celebrated  phrase  of  Julius  Caesar,  who  addresses  Terence  as  "  dimidiate 
Menander, "n  or  "  halved  Menander."  The  imitations  of  Menander  are  at 
once  a  proof  of  his  reputation,  and  an  aid  in  appreciating  his  poetic  char 
acter.  Among  the  Greeks,  Alciphron  and  Lucian12  were,  in  various  de 
grees,  indebted  to  his  comedies.  Among  the  Romans,  Caecilius,  Afranius, 
and  more  particularly  Terence,  are  well  known  to  have  drawn  largely  on 
his  rich  stores. 

Menander  is  remarkable  for  the  elegance  with  which  he  threw  into 
single  verses  or  short  sentences  the  maxims  of  that  practical  wisdom  in 
the  affairs  of  common  life  which  forms  so  important  a  feature  in  the  new 
comedy.  Various  "  Anthologies"  of  such  sentences  were  compiled  by  the 
ancient  grammarians  from  his  works,  of  which  there  is  still  extant  a  very 

I  Ap.  Aul.  GtlL,  xvii.,  4.  2  xviL)  21.  3  Ibi8t  593.  4  Epist.,  ii.,  4. 
5  Aul.  Gell.,  xvii.,  4.                     6  /rf.  ib.                  7  paus.,  i.,  21,  1. 

8  Comp.  Mm.  et  Arist.,  p.  854,  B.  9  Brunck,  Anal.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  269. 

10  Or,  according  to  Scaliger's  correction,  irorepbv  aire/uu/u^o-ai-o. 

II  Donat.  Vit.  Terent.,  p.  754,  12  Meinckc,  p.  xxxv. 

P 


226 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


interesting  specimen,  in  the  collection  of  several  hundred  lines,  under  the 
title  of  yvw/jiai  /j.ov6(TTixoi.  The  number  of  Menander's  comedies  is  stated 
at  a  few  more  than  a  hundred  ;  105,  108,  and  109,  according  to  different 
authorities.1  We  know  with  certainty  the  date  of  only  one  of  the  plays, 
namely,  the  '0/7777,  which  was  brought  out  in  B.C.  321,  when  Menander 
was  only  in  his  twenty-first  year.  We  have  fragments  of  or  references 
to  plays,  amounting  in  all  to  nearly  ninety  titles.  There  are  also  about 
500  fragments  which  can  not  be  assigned  to  their  proper  places.  To  these 
must  be  added  the  yvu^ai  povAffTixoi,  some  passages  of  the  yva>p.cu  (or  <rvy- 
Kpiffis)  MfvavSpov  Kal  $iAi(TTiWos,  and  two  epigrams,  one  in  the  Greek  An 
thology,  and  one  in  the  Latin  version  of  Ausonius.2  Of  the  letters  to 
Ptolemy,  which  Suidas  mentions,  nothing  survives,  and  it  may  fairly  be 
doubted  whether  they  were  not,  like  the  so-called  letters  of  other  great 
men  of  antiquity,  the  productions  of  the  later  rhetoricians.  Suidas  as 
cribes  to  him  some  orations,  a  statement  of  which  there  is  no  confirma 
tion  ;  but  Quintilian  tells  us  that  some  ascribed  the  orations  of  Charisius 
to  Menander.3  There  were  several  commentaries  on  Menander  among 
the  ancients,  and  one  in  particular  by  the  grammarian  Aristophanes,  whose 
admiration  of  the  poet  we  have  already  mentioned. 

The  first  attempt  at  a  complete  critical  edition  of  Menander,  after  several  previous 
editions  of  the  poet,  was  the  following  :  Menandri  et  Philcmonis  Reliquiae,  quotquot  repe- 
rire  potuerunt,  cum  notis  Hug.  Grotii  et  Joh.  Clerici,  Amst.,  1709,  8vo.  This  edition  was 
reprinted  in  1732,  1752, 1771,  and  1777,  but  has  been  very  generally  condemned.  Its  only 
merit  is  that  it  gave  occasion  to  Bentley's  emendations  on  323  passages  of  the  frag 
ments.  (Cf.  Monk's  Life  ofBentley,  p.  211.)  Since  the  publication  of  that  work  there 
has  been  no  edition  of  Menander  worthy  of  notice,  except  that  his  •yi/wju.at  have  had  a 
place  in  the  various  collections  of  the  gnomic  poets,  until  the  appearance  of  Meineke's 
Menandri  et  Philemonis  Reliquiae,  Berol.,  1823,  8vo.  This  admirable  edition  contains, 
besides  the  fragments,  dissertations  on  the  lives  and  writings  of  the  two  poets,  and  also 
Bentley's  emendations  of  the  fragments.  The  fragments  were  reprinted  by  Meineke 
(with  the  annotations  somewhat  condensed),  in  his  larger  (1841)  and  smaller  (1847) 
editions  of  the  Fragmenta  Comicorum  Graecorum.  In  the  larger  edition  they  are  given 
in  vol.  iv.,  p.  69,  seqq.,  in  the  smaller,  p.  867,  seqq.,  vol.  ii.  Meineke's  collection  has 
been  reprinted  (carefully  revised)  by  Dubner,  as  an  Appendix,' along  with  those  of  Phile 
mon,  to  the  Aristophanes  of  Didot's  Bibliotheca,  Paris,  1839.4 

IV.  DIPHILUS  (AfynAos),  a  contemporary  of  Menander  and  Philemon,  was 
a  native  of  Sinope.5  He  is  said  to  have  exhibited  one  hundred  plays,  and 
sometimes  to  have  acted  himself.  Though,  in  point  of  time,  Diphilus  be 
longed  to  the  new  comedy,  his  poetry  seems  to  have  had  more  of  the 
character  of  the  middle.  This  is  shown,  among  other  indications,  by  the 
frequency  with  which  he  chooses  mythological  subjects  for  his  plays,  and 
by  his  bringing  on  the  stage  the  poets  Archilochus,  Hipponax,  and  Sappho.6 
His  language  is  simple  and  elegant,  but  contains,  at  the  same  time,  many 
departures  from  Attic  purity.  The  Roman  comic  poets  borrowed  largely 
from  Diphilus.  The  Casino,  of  Plautus  is  a  translation  of  his  KA7j/?ou^ej/oi.7 
His  ~2,waTroOvf]<TKovrfs  was  translated  by  Plautus  in  the  lost  play  of  the 

1  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Anon.,  De  Com.,  p.  xii. ;  Donat.  Vit.  Terent.,  p.  753  ;  Aul.  Gell.,  xvii.,  4. 

2  Epig.,  139.  3  Quint.,  x.,  1,  70.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Btogr.,  s.  v. 
5  Strab.,  xii.,  p.  546 ;  Anon.,  De  Com.,  p.  xxx.,  seq. 

«  Athen.,  xi.,  p.  487,  A  ;  xiii.,  p.  599,  D.  7  Plant.,  Can.  Prolog.,  31. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  227 

CommorietUes,  and  was  partly  followed  by  Terence  in  his  Adelphi.1  The 
Rudens  of  Plautus  is  also  a  translation  of  a  play,2  but  the  title  of  the  Greek 
piece  is  not  known.  The  fragments  of  Diphilus  are  given  by  Meineke, 
Fragm.  Comic.  Grcec.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  1066,  seqq.,  ed.  min. 

V.  POSIDIPPUS  (no(rei§£7T7ros)  was  a  native  of  Cassandrea,  in  Macedonia, 
and  one  of  the  six  principal  poets  of  the  new  comedy.3     He  began  to  ex 
hibit  dramas  in  the  third  year  after  the  death  of  Menander,  that  is,  in  B.C. 
289,  so  that  his  time  falls  just  at  the  era  in  Greek  literary  history  which 
is  marked  by  the  accession  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus.4    Of  the  events  in 
the  poet's  life  nothing  is  known  ;  but  his  portrait  is  preserved  to  us  in  the 
beautiful  sitting  statue  in  the  Vatican,  which,  with  the  accompanying 
statue  of  Menander,  is  esteemed  by  Winckelmann  and  others  as  among 
the  finest  works  of  Greek  sculpture  that  have  come  down  to  us.5    Ac 
cording  to  Suidas,  he  wrote  forty  plays,  of  which  eighteen  titles  are  pre 
served.     In  his  language  Meineke  has  detected  some  new  words,  and  old 
words  in  new  senses,  totally  unknown  to  the  best  Attic  writers.    Gellius 
mentions  him  among  the  Greek  comedians  who  were  imitated  by  the 
Latin  poets.     It  seems  from  the  titles  that  some  of  his  plays  were  of  a 
licentious  character.      The  fragments  are  given  by  Meineke,   Fragm, 
Gr<zc.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  1141,  seqq.,  ed.  min.6 

VI.  APOLLODORUS  ('A-TroAAoScopos),  a  native  of  Carystus,  in  Euboea,  was 
the  last  in  the  canon  of  the  six  principal  poets  of  the  new  comedy.     It 
was  from  him  that  Terence  took  his  Hecyra  and  Phormio.     According  to 
Suidas,  Apollodorus  wrote  forty-seven  comedies,  and  gained  the  prize 
five  times.     We  know  the  titles  and  possess  fragments  of  several  of  his 
plays.     The  fragments  are  given  by  Meineke,  Fragm.  Comic.  Grcec.,  vol. 
ii.,  p.  1101,  seqq.,  cd.  min.'1 


CHAPTER  XXXI. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD— continued. 
OTHER     POETS     OK     THIS     P  E  R I  O  D.8 

I.  THE  drama  was  so  well  adapted  to  reflect  the  thoughts  and  feelings 
of  the  people  of  Attica  in  the  mirror  of  poetry,  that  other  sorts  of  metric 
al  composition  fell  comparatively  into  the  background,  and  for  the  public 
in  general  assumed  the  character  rather  of  isolated  and  momentary  grat 
ifications  than  of  a  poetic  expression  of  prevailing  sentiments  and  prin 
ciples. 

II.  Still,  however,  some  names  occur  well  deserving  of  mention,  espe 
cially  in  the  two  departments  of  Elegiac  and  Epic  verse,  and  to  a  brief 
consideration  of  these  we  will  devote  the  present  chapter,  before  pro 
ceeding  to  the  more  enlarged  field  of  prose  composition. 

1  Terent.,  ProL  Adelph.,  10.  2  Plant.,  Rud.  Prol.,  32. 

3  Anon.,  De  Com.,  p.  xxx.  4  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  s.  a. 

5  Visconti,  Mus.  Pio-Clem.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  16,  seqq. ;  Winckelmann,Vorlaitf.Abhand.,  c.  iv., 
^  126.  e  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr..  s.  v.  7  Id.  ib.,  s.  v. 

"  Mullor,  Hist,  Gr   Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  56,  seqq. 


228  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


I.     ELEGIAC     POETRY. 

III.  The  Elegy  still  continued  a  favorite  poetical  amusement  while 
Attic  literature  flourished ;  it  remained  true  to  one  of  its  particular  desig 
nations,  to  enliven  the  banquet  and  to  shed  the  gentle  light  of  a  higher 
poetic  feeling  over  the  convivialities  of  the  feast.     Consequently,  the 
fragments  of  elegies  belonging  to  this  period,  by  ION  of  Chios,  DIONYSIUS 
of  Athens,  EUENUS,  the  sophist,  of  Paros,  and  CRITIAS  of  Athens,  all  speak 
much  of  wine,  of  the  proper  mode  of  drinking,  of  dancing  and  singing  at 
banquets,  of  the  cottabus-game,  which  young  people  were  then  so  fond  of, 
and  of  other  things  of  the  same  kind,  and  they  took  as  their  subject  the 
joys  of  the  banquet,  and  the  right  measure  to  be  observed  at  it.1 

IV.  This  elegiac  poetry  proceeds  on  the  principle  that  we  should  enjoy 
ourselves  in  society,  combining  the  pleasures  of  the  senses  with  intellect 
ual  gratifications,  and  not  forgetting  our  higher  calling  in  the  midst  of 
such  enjoyments.     As,  however,  the  thoughts  easily  passed  from  the 
festal  board  to  the  general  social  and  political  interests  of  the  times,  the 
elegy  had  political  features  also,  and  statesmen  often  expressed  in  this 
form  their  opinions  on  the  course  to  be  adopted  for  Greece  in  general, 
and  for  the  different  republics  in  particular.     This  must  have  been  the 
case  with  the  elegies  of  DIONYSIUS,  who  was  a  considerable  statesman 
of  the  time  of  Pericles,  and  led  the  Athenians  who  settled  at  Thurii  in 
the  great  Hellenic  migration  to  that  place. 

V.  The  political  tendency  appeared  still  more  clearly  in  the  elegies  of 
CRITIAS,  the  son  of  Callaeschrus,  in  which  he  said  bluntly  that  he  had 
recommended  in  the  public  assembly  that  Alcibiades  should  be  recalled, 
and  had  drawn  up  the  decree.     The  predilection  for  Lacedsemon,  which 
Critias  had  imbibed  as  one  of  the  Eupatridae,  and  as  a  friend  of  Socrates, 
declares  itself  in  his  commendations  of  the  old  customs  which  the  Spar 
tans  kept  up  at  their  banquets.2 

VI.  From  this  elegiac  poetry,  however,  which  was  cultivated  in  the 
circle  of  Attic  training,  we  must  carefully  distinguish  the  elegies  of  AN- 
TiMACHus,3  which  we  may  term  a  revival  of  the  love-sorrows  of  Mimner- 
mus.     Antimachus  was  a  native  of  Claros.     He  is  usually,  however, 
called  a  Colophonian,  probably  only  because  Claros  belonged  to  the  do 
minion  of  Colophon.     He  flourished  during  the  latter  period  of  the  Pelo- 
ponnesian  war.*    Antimachus  was  in  general  a  reviver  of  ancient  poetry; 
one  who,  keeping  aloof  from  the  stream  of  the  new-fashioned  literature, 
applied  himself  exclusively  to  his  own  studies,  and  on  that  very  account 
found  little  sympathy  among  the  people  of  his  own  time,  as,  indeed,  ap 
pears  from  the  well-known  story  that,  when  he  was  reciting  his  Thebais, 
all  his  audience  left  the  room,  with  the  single  exception  of  Plato,  then  a 
young  man.5     This  want  of  sympathy,  however,  in  the  case  of  the  The- 
bais  at  least,  must  have  been  greatly  increased  by  the  voluminous  nature 
of  his  poem,  since  we  are  told  that  he  had  spun  out  his  work  so  much, 
that  in  the  twenty-fourth  book  his  seven  heroes  had  not  yet  arrived  at 

'  Mutter,  1.  c.  2  Id.  ib.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,s.v. 

*  IHod.  Sic.,  xiii.,  108.  5  Milller,  I  r.. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  229 

Thebes.1  According  to  Quintilian,  Antimachus  was  unsuccessful  in  his 
description  of  passion,  his  works  were  not  graceful,  and  were  deficient 
in  arrangement.3  His  style  also  had  not  the  simple  and  easy  flow  of  the 
Homeric  poems.  He  borrowed  expressions  and  phrases  from  the  tragic 
writers,  and  frequently  introduced  Doric  forms.3 

But  the  work  which  brings  him  under  the  present  head  was  his  elegiac 
poem  called  Lyde,  which  was  dedicated  to  the  remembrance  of  a  Lydian 
maid  of  that  name,  whom  Antimachus  had  loved  and  early  lost.  This 
elegy  was  very  celebrated  in  antiquity.  It  was  very  long,  and  consisted 
of  accounts  of  the  misfortunes  of  all  the  mythical  heroes,  who,  like  the 
poet,  had  become  unfortunate  through  the  early  deaths  of  those  whom 
they  loved.4  It  thus  contained  vast  stores  of  mythical  and  antiquarian 
information,  and  it  was  chiefly  for  this,  and  not  for  any  higher  and  poet 
ical  reason,  that  Agatharchides  made  an  abridgment  of  it.* 

From  what  has  here  been  stated  concerning  him,  it  will  be  seen  that 
Antimachus  was  one  of  the  forerunners  of  the  poets  of  the  Alexandrine 
school,  who  wrote  more  for  the  learned,  and  a  select  number  of  readers, 
than  for  the  public  at  large.  The  Alexandrine  grammarians  assigned  to 
him  the  second  place  among  the  epic  poets,  and  the  Emperor  Hadrian 
preferred  his  works  even  to  those  of  Homer.  The  numerous  fragments 
of  this  poet  have  been  collected  and  published  by  Schellenberg,  Halle, 
1786,  re-edited  with  Blomfield's  corrections  by  Giles,  London,  1838.  Some 
additional  fragments  are  contained  in  Stoll's  Animadversiones  in  Antimachi 
Fragm.,  Getting.,  1840.  The  epic  fragments,  or  those  belonging  to  the 
Thebais,  are  collected  in  Duntzer's  "Die  Fragm.  der  Episch.  Foes,  der 
Griech.  bis  auf  Alexander,"  p.  99,  seqq. ;  and  by  Diibner  in  the  Poeta  Epici 
Minor  es,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Gr&ca,  Paris,  1840. 

II.     EPIC     POETRY. 

VII.  The  mention  of  Antimachus  and  his  Thebais  has  in  some  degree 
anticipated  the  present  head,  and  no  further  notice  of  that  work  need 
here  be  taken.     The  only  other  epic  poets  deserving  of  mention  are  Pa- 
nyasis  and  Charilus. 

VIII.  PANYASIS  (llcu/iWis)  was  a  native  of  Halicarnassus,6  and  proba 
bly  the  maternal  uncle  of  Herodotus.    "He  began  to  be  known  about 
B.C.  489,  continued  in  reputation  till  B.C.  467,  in  which  year  he  is  placed 
by  Suidas,  and  was  put  to  death  by  Lygdamis,  tyrant  of  Halicarnassus, 
probably  about  the  same  time  that  Herodotus  left  his  native  city,  that  is, 
about  B.C.  457.7    Ancient  writers  mention  two  poems  by  Panyasis.     Of 
these  the  most  celebrated  was  entitled  Heracleia  ('Hpd/cAeta)  or  Herackias 
('Hpa/cAejas),  and  gave  a  detailed  account  of  the  exploits  of  Hercules.     It 
consisted  of  fourteen  books  and  nine  thousand  verses,  and  appears,  as 
far  as  we  can  judge  from  the  references  to  it  in  ancient  writers,  to  have 

1  Porph.  ad  Herat.,  Ep.  ad  Pis.,  146. 

a  Quint.,  x.,  1,  53.     Compare  Dion.  Hal.,  De  Verb.  Comp.,  22. 

3  Schol.  ad  Nicand.,  Theriac.,  3.  *  Plut.,  Consol.  ad  Apollon.,  p.  106,  B. 

5  Phot.,  Bibl,  p.  171,  ed.  Bekfcer.        6  Pausan.,  x.,  8,  5 ;  Clem.  Alex.,  Strom.,  vi.,  2,  52. 

7  nintmi,  Fast.  Hell.,  sub  annis  489,  457, 


230  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

passed  over  briefly  the  adventures  of  the  hero  which  had  been  related  by 
previous  poets,  and  to  have  dwelt  chiefly  upon  his  exploits  in  Asia,  Libya, 
&c.  An  outline  of  the  contents  of  the  various  books,  as  far  as  they  can 
be  restored,  is  given  by  Miiller,  in  an  appendix  to  his  work  on  the  Dori 
ans.1  The  other  poem  of  Panyasis  bore  the  name  of  lonica  ('Icoj/i/ca),  and 
contained  seven  thousand  verses.  It  gave  the  history  of  Neleus,  Co- 
drus,  and  the  Ionic  colonies.  Suidas  says  it  was  written  in  pentameters  ; 
but  it  is  improbable  that,  at  so  early  a  period,  a  poem  of  such  a  length 
was  written  simply  in  pentameters ;  still,  as  no  fragments  have  come 
down  to  us,  we  have  no  certain  information  on  the  subject. 

We  do  not  know  what  impression  the  poems  of  Panyasis  made  upon 
his  contemporaries  and  their  immediate  descendants,  but  it  \\-as  probably 
not  great,  since  he  is  not  mentioned  by  any  of  the  great  Greek  writers. 
But  in  later  times  his  works  were  extensively  read,  and  much  admired. 
The  Alexandrine  grammarians  ranked  him  with  Homer,  Hesiod,  Ptsan- 
der,  and  Antimachus,  as  one  of  the  five  principal  epic  poets,  and  some 
even  went  so  far  as  to  compare  him  with  Homer.2  Panyasis  occupied 
an  intermediate  position  between  the  later  cyclic  poets  and  the  studied 
efforts  of  Antimachus,  who  is  stated  to  have  been  his  pupil.  From  two 
of  the  longest  fragments  which  have  come  down  to  us,  it  appears  that 
Panyasis  kept  close  to  the  old  Ionic  form  of  epic  poetry,  and  had  imbibed 
no  small  portion  of  the  Homeric  spirit.3  The  fragments  of  the  Heraclea 
are  given  in  the  collections  of  the  Greek  poets  by  Winterton,  Brunck, 
Boissonade,  and  Gaisford  ;  in  Diintzer's  Fragments  of  Greek  epic  poetry  ; 
in  Tzschirner's  De  Panyasidis  Vita  et  Canmnibus  Dissertatio,  Vratisl.,  1836 ; 
and  in  Funcke's  De  Panyasidis  Vita  ac  Poesi  Dissertalio,  Bonn,  1837. 

IX.  CHCERILUS  (Xoipi\os)  or  CHCERILLUS  (XotptAAos),4  a  native  of  Samos, 
was  born  about  B.C.  470,  and  died  at  the  court  of  Archelaus,  king  of  Ma 
cedonia,  consequently  not  later  than  B.C.  399,  which  was  the  last  year 
of  Archelaus.  Suidas  says  that  Chcerilus  was  a  slave  at  Samos,  and  was 
distinguished  for  his  beauty ;  that  he  ran  away,  and  resided  with  Hero 
dotus,  from  whom  he  acquired  a  taste  for  literature  ;  and  that  he  turned 
his  attention  subsequently  to  poetry.  Athenaeus  states  that  Chcerilus  re 
ceived  from  Archelaus,  after  having  taken  up  his  residence  at  his  court, 
four  minse  a  day,8  and  spent  if  all  upon  good  living  (b^o<pay(a.v).  Chceri 
lus  was  the  author  of  an  epic  poem  on  the  wars  of  the  Greeks  with  Da 
rius  and  Xerxes.  The  exact  title  of  the  work,  however,  is  not  known. 
It  may  have  been  nepcn/ca.  It  is  remarkable  as  the  earliest  attempt  to 
celebrate  in  epic  verse  events  which  were  nearly  contemporary  with  the 
poet's  life.  Of  its  character  we  may  form  some  conjecture  from  the  con 
nection  between  the  poet  and  Herodotus.  There  are  also  fragments  pre 
served  by  Aristotle  from  the  Procemium  ;6  by  Ephorus,  from  the  descrip 
tion  of  Darius's  bridge  of  boats,  in  which  the  Scythians  are  mentioned  ;7 
by  Josephus,  from  the  catalogue  of  the  nations  in  the  army  of  Xerxes, 

1  vol.  i.,  p.  532,  Eng.  transl. 

2  Compare  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Dionys.,  De  Vet.  Script.  Cens.,  c.  2,  p.  419,  ed.  Reiske. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Id.  ib.  5  Athen.,  viii.,  p.  345,  E. 
«  Aristot.,  Rhet.,  iii.,  14.  7  Strab.,  xii.,  p.  303. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  231 

among  whom  were  the  Jews  ;x  and  other  fragments,  the  place  of  which 
is  uncertain.  The  chief  action  of  the  poem  appears  to  have  been  the  bat 
tle  of  Salamis.  The  high  estimation  in  which  Chcerilus  was  held  is  proved 
by  his  reception  into  the  epic  canon  ;  from  which,  however,  he  was  again 
expelled  by  the  Alexandrine  grammarians,  and  Antimachus  was  put  in  his 
place,  on  account  of  a  statement  which  was  made  on  the  authority  of 
Heraclides  Ponticus,  that  Plato  very  much  preferred  Antimachus  to  Chce- 
rilus.2  The  great  inferiority  of  Chcerilus  to  Homer  in  his  similes  is  no 
ticed  by  Aristotle.  Chcerilus  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  worthless 
poet  of  the  same  name,  a  native  of  lasos,  and  one  of  the  train  of  Alex 
ander  the  Great,  of  whom  Horace  makes  mention.  The  fragments  of 
Chcerilus  are  given  by  Nake,  "  Choerili  Samii  Fragmenta,"  Lips.,  1817. 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD— continued. 

PROSE     WRITINGS.3 

I.  WE  have  seen  both  tragedy  and  comedy,  in  their  latter  days,  grad 
ually  sinking  into  prose  ;  and  this  has  shown  us  that  prose  was  the  most 
powerful  instrument  in  the  literature  of  the  time,  and  has  made  us  the 
more  curious  to  investigate  its  tendency,  its  progress,  and  its  develop 
ment. 

II.  The  cultivation  of  prose  belongs  almost  entirely  to  the  period  which 
intervened  between  the  Persian  war  and  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great. 
Before  this  time  every  attempt  at  prose  composition  was  either  so  little 
removed  from  the  colloquial  style  of  the  day,  as  to  forfeit  all  claim  to  be 
considered  as  a  written  language,  properly  so  called  ;  or  else  owed  all  its 
charms  and  splendor  to  an  imitation  of  the  diction  and  the  forms  of  words 
found  in  poetry,  which  attained  to  completeness  and  maturity  many  hund 
red  years  before  the  rise  of  a  prose  literature. 

III.  In  considering  the  history  of  Attic  prose,  we  propose  to  give  a 
view  of  the  general  character  of  the  works  of  the  prose  writers,  and  their 
relation  to  the  circumstances  and  intellectual  energy  of  the  Athenian 
people.     And,  in  order  to  effect  this  in  the  clearest  and  most  satisfactory 
manner,  we  will  divide  the  remainder  of  the  present  period  into  three 
great  branches,  namely,  the  SCHOOL  OK  HISTORY,  the  SCHOOL  OF  ELO 
QUENCE,  and  the  SCHOOL  OF  PHILOSOPHY,  giving  an  account  of  the  most 
prominent  individuals  connected  with  each. 

I.     SCHOOL     OF     HISTORY. 

IV.  THUCYDIDES  (©otwuSi'STys),4  the  great  Athenian  historian,  was  the  son 
of  Olorus5  or  Orolus6  and  Hegesipyle.     According  to  a  stalement  of  Pam- 
phila,  a  female  historian  in  the  time  of  Nero,  and  who  is  cited  by  Gellius, 

1  Joseph,  c.  Apion.,  L,  22;  vol.  ii.,  p.  454,  ed.  Hav. 

2  Proclus,  Comm.  in  Plat.  Tim.,  p.  28.  3  Mutter,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  66. 
4  Smi»>  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.               *  Thucyd.,  iv.,  104.  6  Marcell,  Vil.  Thucud. 


232  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

he  was  forty  years  of  age  at  the  commencement  of  the  Peloponnesian 
war,  or  B.C.  431,  and,  accordingly,  he  was  born  B.C.  471.  Kruger  at 
tempts  to  show,  indeed,  on  the  authority  of  Marcellinus,  that  Thucydides 
was  only  about  twenty-five  years  of  age  at  the  commencement  of  the 
war ;  but  he  relies  too  much  on  his  own  interpretation  of  certain  words 
of  Thucydides,  which  are  by  no  means  free  from  ambiguity  (ala-Bav^fvos 
TI?  ^Ai/ct'a).1  He  is  said  to  have  been  connected  with  the  family  of  Cimon, 
and  we  know  that  Miltiades,  the  conqueror  at  Marathon,  married  Hege- 
sipyle,  the  daughter  of  a  Thracian  king  named  Olorus,2  by  whom  she  be 
came  the  mother  of  Cimon  ;  whence  it  has  been  conjectured,  with  much 
probability,  that  the  mother  of  Thucydides  was  a  grand-daughter  of  Mil 
tiades  and  Hegesipyle. 

There  is  a  story  in  Lucian3  of  Herodotus  having  read  his  history  at  the 
Olympic  games  to  the  assembled  Greeks ;  and  Suidas  adds,  that  Thu 
cydides,  then  a  boy,  was  present,  and  shed  tears  of  emulation  ;  a  presage 
of  his  own  future  historical  distinction.  This  story,  of  which  we  have 
already  made  mention  in  the  account  given  by  us  of  Herodotus,  has  been 
discussed  most  completely  by  Dahlmann,4  as  we  there  remarked,  and 
been  rejected  as  a  mere  fable.  Thucydides  is  said  to  have  been  instruct 
ed  in  oratory  by  Antiphon,  and  in  philosophy  by  Anaxagoras,  but  whether 
these  statements  are  to  be  received  can  not  be  determined.  It  is  certain, 
however,  that,  being  an  Athenian  of  a  good  family,  and  living  in  a  city 
which  was  the  centre  of  Greek  civilization,  he  must  have  had  the  best 
possible  education.  That  he  was  a  man  of  great  ability  and  of  cultivated 
understanding,  his  work  itself  clearly  shows.  He  informs  us  that  he 
possessed  gold  mines  in  that  part  of  Thrace  which  is  opposite  to  the  isl 
and  of  Thasos,  and  that  he  was  a  person  of  the  greatest  influence  among 
those  in  that  quarter.5  This  property,  according  to  some  accounts,  he  had 
from  his  ancestors ;  according  to  other  accounts,  he  married  a  rich  woman 
of  Scaptesyle,  and  received  these  mines  as  a  portion  with  her. 

Suidas  says  that  Thucydides  left  a  son,  called  Timotheus  ;  and  a  daugh 
ter  also  is  mentioned,  who  is  said  to  have  written  the  eighth  book  of  the 
history.  Thucydides  was  one  of  those  who  suffered  from  the  great  plague 
of  Athens,  and  one  of  the  few  who  recovered.6 

We  have  no  trustworthy  evidence  of  Thucydides  having  distinguished 
himself  as  an  orator,  though  it  is  not  unlikely  that  he  did,  for  his  orator 
ical  talent  is  shown  by  the  speeches  which  he  has  inserted  in  his  history. 
He  was,  however,  employed  in  a  military  capacity,  and  was  in  command 
of  an  Athenian  squadron  of  seven  ships  at  Thasos,  B.C.  424,  when  Eucles, 
who  commanded  in  Amphipolis,  sent  for  his  assistance  against  Brasidas, 
who  was  before  that  town  with  an  army.  Brasidas,  fearing  the  arrival  of 
a  superior  force,  offered  favorable  terms  to  Amphipolis,  which  were  read 
ily  accepted,  for  there  were  few  Athenians  in  the  place,  and  the  rest  did 
not  wish  to  make  resistance.  Thucydides  arrived  at  Eion,  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Strymon,  on  the  evening  of  the  same  day  on  which  Amphipolis  sur- 

i  Thucyd.,  v.,  26  ;  Poppo,  ad  loc.  2  Herod.,  vi.,  39. 

3  Lucian,  Herod,  s.  Act.,  i.,  seqq.  *  Life  of  Herodotus,  p.  8,  seqq.,  Eng.  transl. 

*  Thucyd.,  iv.,  105.  fi  M,  ii.,  48. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  233 

rendered.;  and  though  he  was  too  late  to  save  Arnphipolis,  he  prevented 
Eion  from  falling  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy.1  In  consequence  of  this 
failure,  Thucydides  became  an  exile,  probably  to  avoid  a  severer  punish 
ment,  that  of  death,  for  such  appears  to  have  been  the  penalty  of  a  failure 
like  his,  though  he  may  have  done  the  best  that  he  could.  According  to 
Marcellinus,  Cleon,  who  was  at  that  time  in  great  favor  with  the  Atheni 
ans,  excited  popular  suspicion  against  the  unfortunate  commander.  Thu 
cydides  simply  says  that  he  lived  in  exile  twenty  years  after  the  affair  of 
Arnphipolis,2  but  he  does  not  say  whether  it  was  a  voluntary  exile  or  a 
punishment. 

There  are  various  untrustworthy  accounts  as  to  his  places  of  residence 
during  his  exile  ;  but  we  may  conclude  that  he  could  not  safely  reside  in 
any  place  which  was  under  Athenian  dominion,  and,  as  he  kept  his  eye 
on  the  events  of  the  war,  he  must  have  lived  in  those  parts  which  be 
longed  to  the  Spartan  alliance.  His  own  words  certainly  imply  that,  dur 
ing  his  exile,  he  spent  much  of  his  time  either  in  the  Peloponnesus  or  in 
places  which  were  under  Peloponnesian  influence  ;3  and  his  work  was 
the  result  of  his  own  experience  and  observations.  His  minute  descrip 
tion  of  Syracuse  and  the  neighborhood  leads  to  the  probable  conclusion 
that  he  was  personally  acquainted  with  the  localities  ;  and,  if  he  visited 
Sicily,  it  is  probable  that  he  also  saw  some  parts  of  Southern  Italy ;  in 
deed,  an  anonymous  biographer  speaks  of  his  having  been  at  Sybaris. 
But  it  is  rather  too  bold  a  conjecture  to  make,  as  some  have  done,  that 
Olorus  and  his  son  Thucydides  went  out  in  the  colony  to  Thurii,  B.C.  443, 
which  was  joined  by  Herodotus,  and  the  orator  Lysias,  then  a  young  man. 
Thucydides  says  that  he  lived  in  exile  twenty  years  ;*  and  as  his  exile 
commenced  in  the  beginning  of  B.C.  423,  he  may  have  returned  to  Athens 
in  the  beginning  of  B.C.  403,  about  the  time  when  Thrasybulus  liberated 
Athens.  Thucydides  is  said  to  have  been  assassinated  at  Athens  soon 
after  his  return  ;  but  other  accounts  place  his  death  in  Thrace.  There 
is  a  general  agreement,  however,  among  the  ancient  authorities  that  he 
came  to  a  violent  end.  His  death  can  not  be  placed  later  than  B.C.  401. 

The  time  when  he  composed  his  work  has  been  a  matter  of  dispute. 
He  himself  informs  us  that  he  was  busy  in  collecting  materials  all  through 
the  war,  from  the  beginning  to  the  end,5  and,  of  course,  he  would  register 
them  as  he  got  them.  Plutarch  says  that  he  wrote  the  work  in  Thrace  ; 
and  his  words  mean  the  whole  work,  as  he  does  not  qualify  them ;  but 
the  work,  in  the  shape  in  which  we  have  it,  was  certainly  not  finished  un 
til  after  the  close  of  the  war ;  and  he  was  probably  engaged  upon  it  at  the 
time  of  his  death. 

A  question  has  also  arisen  as  to  the  authorship  of  the  eighth  and  last 
book  of  Thucydides,  which  breaks  off  in  the  twenty-first  year  of  the  war, 
B.C.  411.  It  differs  from  all  the  other  books  in  containing  no  speeches, 
and  it  has  also  been  supposed  to  be  inferior  to  the  rest  as  a  piece  of  com 
position.  Accordingly,  several  ancient  critics  supposed  that  the  eighth 
book  was  not  by  Thucydides  ;  some  attributed  it  to  his  daughter,  and  some 
toJXenophon  or  Theopompus,  because  both  of  them  continued  the  history. 

i  Thucyd.,  iv.,  102  seqq,         2  /di>  v.,  20.         *  Id.  ib.         *  Id.  ib,         *~7d.t  i.,  22.~ 


234  GREEK     LI  T  E  R  A  T  U  R  E. 

The  words  with  which  Xenophon's  Hellenica  commence  (/uera  Se 
may  chiefly  have  led  to  the  supposition  that  he  was  the  author,  for  his 
work  is  made  to  appear  as  a  continuation  of  that  of  Thucydides  ;  but  this 
argument  is  in  itself  of  little  weight ;  and,  besides,  both  the  style  of  the 
eighth  book  is  different  from  that  of  Xenophon,  and  the  manner  of  treat 
ing  the  subject,  for  the  division  of  the  year  into  summers  and  winters, 
which  Thucydides  has  observed  in  his  first  seven  books,  is  continued  in 
the  eighth,  but  is  not  observed  by  Xenophon.  The  rhetorical  style  of 
Theopompus  also,  which  was  the  characteristic  of  his  writing,  renders  it 
improbable  that  he  was  the  author  of  the  eighth  book.  It  seems  the  sim 
plest  supposition  to  consider  Thucydides  himself  as  the  author  of  this 
book,  since  he  names  himself  as  the  author  twice  (viii.,  6,  60) ;  but  it  is 
probable  that  he  had  not  the  opportunity  of  revising  it  with  the  same  care 
as  the  first  seven  books.  It  is  stated  by  an  ancient  writer  that  Xenophon 
made  the  work  of  Thucydides  known,  which  may  be  true,  as  he  wrote  the 
first  two  books  of  his  Hellenica,  or  the  part  which  now  ends  with  the  sec 
ond  book,  for  the  purpose  of  completing  the  history. 

The  work  of  Thucydides,  from  the  commencement  of  the  second  book, 
is  chronologically  divided  into  winters  and  summers,  and  each  summer  and 
winter  make  a  year.1  His  summer  comprises  the  time  from  the  vernal  to 
the  autumnal  equinox,  and  the  winter  comprises  the  period  from  the  au 
tumnal  to  the  vernal  equinox.  The  division  into  books  and  chapters  was 
probably  made  by  the  Alexandrine  critics.  There  is  nothing  in  the  work 
itself  which  gives  the  least  intimation  that  the  division  into  books  was  part 
of  the  author's  design  ;  and,  in  fact,  this  same  division  into  books  is  made 
in  a  very  arbitrary  and  clumsy  way.  For  instance,  the  seventh  book 
ought  to  end  with  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  eighth  book  ;  and  the  seventh 
chapter  of  the  eighth  book  ought  to  be  the  first.  There  was  a  division 
of  the  work  also  into  nine  books,2  and  a  still  later  division  into  thirteen 
books.  The  title  of  the  work,  as  well  as  the  division  into  books,  is  prob 
ably  the  act  of  the  critics  or  grammarians.  The  titles  vary  in  the  MSS., 
but  the  simple  one  of  Suyypa^  is  that  which  is  most  appropriate  to  the 
author's  own  expression,  ©owcuSt'Srjs  'AQ-rjvaios  gtWy/Mof'c  T^V  TrJAe/ioj',  /<•.  T.  A.3 

The  history  of  the  Peloponnesian  war  opens  the  second  book  of  Thu 
cydides,  and  the  first  is  introductory  to  the  history.  He  begins  his  first 
book  by  observing  that  the  Peloponnesian  war  was  the  most  important 
event  in  Grecian  history,  which  he  shows  by  a  rapid  review  of  the  his 
tory  of  the  Greeks,  from  the  earliest  periods  to  the  commencement  of 
the  war  (i.,  1-21).  After  his  introductory  chapters,  he  proceeds  to  ex 
plain  the  alleged  grounds  and  causes  of  the  war.  The  real  cause  was,  he 
says,  the  Spartan  jealousy  of  the  Athenian  power.  His  narrative  is  in 
terrupted  (c.  89-118),  after  he  has  come  to  the  time  when  the  Lacedae 
monians  resolved  on  war,  by  a  digression  on  the  rise  and  progress  of 
the  power  of  Athens ;  a  period  which  had  been  either  omitted  by  other 
writers,  or  treated  imperfectly,  and  with  little  regard  to  chronology,  as  by 
Hellanicus  in  his  Attic  history  (c.  97).  He  resumes  his  narrative  (c.  119) 
with  the  negotiations  which  preceded  the  war  ;  but  this  leads  to  another 

.^  ii..  1.  ~  Diod.  Sic.,  xii..  37.  3   Thucytl.,  i.,  1 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  235 

digression  of  some  length  on  the  treason  of  Pausanias  (c.  128-134)  and 
the  exile  of  Themistocles  (c.  135-138).  He  concludes  the  book  with  the 
speech  of  Pericles,  who  advised  the  Athenians  to  refuse  the  demands  of 
the  Peloponnesians  ;  and  his  subject,  as  already  observed,  begins  with 
the  second  book. 

A  history,  intended  by  its  author  as  "  an  eternal  possession,"  which 
treats  of  so  many  events  that  took  place  at  remote  spots,  could  only  be 
written,  in  the  time  of  Thucydides,  by  a  man  who  took  great  pains  to 
ascertain  facts  by  personal  inquiry.  In  modern  times,  facts  are  made 
known  by  printing  as  soon  as  they  occur ;  and  the  printed  records  of  the 
day,  newspapers  and  the  like,  are  often  the  only  evidence  of  many  facts 
which  become  history.  When  we  know  the  careless  way  in  which  facts 
are  now  reported  and  recorded  by  very  incompetent  persons,  often  upon 
very  indifferent  and  hearsay  testimony,  and  compare  with  such  records 
the  pains  that  Thucydides  took  to  ascertain  the  chief  events  of  a  war 
with  which  he  was  contemporary,  in  which  he  took  a  share  as  a  com 
mander,  the  opportunities  which  his  means  allowed,  his  great  abilities, 
and  serious  earnest  character,  it  is  a  fair  conclusion  that  we  have  a  more 
exact  history  of  a  long,  eventful  period  by  Thucydides  than  we  have  of 
any  period  in  modern  history,  equally  long  and  equally  eventful.  His 
whole  wrork  shows  the  most  scrupulous  care  and  diligence  in  ascertain 
ing  facts,  while  his  strict  attention  to  chronology,  and  the  importance 
that  he  attaches  to  it,  are  additional  proofs  of  his  historical  accuracy. 
His  narrative  is  brief  and  concise  :  it  generally  contains  bare  facts  ex 
pressed  in  the  fewest  possible  words  ;  and  when  we  consider  what  pains 
it  must  have  cost  him  to  ascertain  these  facts,  we  admire  the  self-denial 
of  a  writer  who  is  satisfied  with  giving  facts  in  their  naked  brevity,  with 
out  ornament,  without  any  parade  of  his  personal  importance,  and  of  the 
trouble  that  his  matter  cost  him.  A  single  chapter  must  sometimes  have 
represented  the  labor  of  many  days  and  weeks.  Such  a  principle  of  his 
torical  composition  is  the  evidence  of  a  great  and  elevated  mind.  The 
history  of  Thucydides  only  makes  an  octavo  volume  of  moderate  size ; 
many  a  modern  writer  would  have  spun  it  out  to  a  dozen  volumes,  and 
so  have  spoiled  it.  A  work  that  is  for  all  ages  must  contain  much  in  lit 
tle  compass.1 

Thucydides  seldom  makes  reflections  in  the  course  of  his  narrative. 
Occasionally  he  has  a  chapter  of  political  and  moral  observations,  ani 
mated  by  the  keenest  perceptions  of  the  motives  of  action  and  the  moral 
character  of  man.  Many  of  his  speeches  are  political  essays,  or  materi 
als  for  them  :  they  are  not  mere  imaginations  of  his  own  for  rhetorical 
effect ;  they  contain  the  general  sense  of  what  was  actually  delivered  as 
nearly  as  he  could  ascertain,  and  in  many  instances  he  had  good  opportu 
nities  of  knowing  what  was  said,  for  he  heard  some  speeches  delivered.8 
His  opportunities,  his  talents,  his  character,  and  his  subject  all  combined 
to  produce  a  work  that  stands  alone,  and  in  its  kind  has  neither  equal 
nor  rival.  His  pictures  are  sometimes  striking  and  tragic,  an  effect  pro 
duced  by  severe  simplicity  and  minute  particularity.  Such  is  the  de- 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  r.  3  TJiucyd.,  i.,  22. 


236  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

scription  of  the  plague  of  Athens.     Such  also  is  the  incomparable  history 
of  the  Athenian  expedition  to  Sicily,  and  its  melancholy  termination. 

A  man  who  thinks  profoundly  will  have  a  form  of  expression  which  is 
stamped  with  the  character  of  his  mind  ;  and  the  style  of  Thucydides  is 
accordingly  concise,  vigorous,  and  energetic.  We  feel  that  all  the  words 
were  intended  to  have  a  meaning :  none  of  them  are  idle.  Yet  he  is 
sometimes  harsh  and  obscure  ;  and  probably  he  was  so  even  to  his  own 
countrymen.  Some  of  his  sentences  are  very  involved,  and  the  connec 
tion  and  dependence  of  the  parts  are  often  difficult  to  seize.  Cicero,  un 
doubtedly  a  good  Greek  scholar,  found  him  difficult  :l  he  says  that  the 
speeches  contain  so  many  obscure  and  impenetrable  sentences  as  to  be 
scarcely  intelligible  ;  and  this,  he  adds,  is  a  very  great  defect  in  the  lan 
guage  of  political  life  (in  oratione  cimti). 

TEXT    AND    EDITIONS    OF    THUCYDIDES. 

The  first  thing  that  is  requisite  in  reading  Thucydides  is  to  have  a  good  text,  estab 
lished  on  a  collation  of  the  MSS.,  and  this  we  owe  to  Bekker.  Those  who  were  accus 
tomed  to  read  Thucydides  in  such  a  text  as  Duker's  can  estimate  their  obligations  to 
Bekker.  For- the  understanding  of  the  text,  a  sound  knowledge  of  the  language,  and  the 
assistance  of  the  best  critics  are  necessary,  and  perhaps  nearly  all  has  been  done  in 
this  department  that  can  be  done.  But,  after  all,  a  careful  and  repeated  study  of  the 
original  is  necessary  in  order  to  understand  it.  For  the  illustration  of  the  text  a  great 
mass  of  geographical  and  historical  knowledge  is  requisite ;  and  here  also  the  critics 
have  not  been  idle.  To  derive  all  the  advantage,  however,  from  the  work  that  may  be 
derived  for  political  instruction,  we  must  study  it ;  and  here  the  critics  give  little  help, 
for  Politik  is  a  thing  they  seldom  meddle  with,  and  not  often  with  success.  Here,  then, 
a  man  must  be  his  own  commentator ;  but  a  great  deal  might  be  done  by  a  competent 
hand  in  illustrating  Thucydides  as  a  political  writer.2 

The  Greek  text  was  first  published  by  Aldus,  Venice,  1502,  fol.,  and  the  scholia  were 
published  in  the  following  year.  The  first  Latin  translation,  which  was  by  Valla,  was 
printed  before  1500,  and  reprinted  at  Paris,  1513,  fol.,  and  frequently  after  that  date.  The 
first  edition  of  the  Greek  text  accompanied  by  a  Latin  version  was  that  of  II.  Stephens, 
1564,  fol.,  the  Latin  version  being  that  of  Valla,  revised  by  Stephens.  This  well-printed 
edition  contains  the  scholia,  the  life  of  Thucydides  by  Marcellinus,  and  an  anonymous 
life  of  the  historian.  The  edition  of  Bekker,  Berlin,  1821,  3  vols.  8vo  (reprinted  Oxford, 
3  vols.  8vo,  1824),  forms  an  epoch  in  the  editions  of  Thucydides,  and,  as  regards  the 
text,  renders  it  unnecessary  to  consult  any  which  are  of  prior  date.  Among  the  best 
editions  since  the  appearance  of  Bekker's  we  may  mention  that  of  Poppo,  Leipzig,  10 
vols.  8vo,  1821-38,  of  which  two  volumes  are  filled  with  Prolegomena;  ofHaack,  with 
selections  from  the  scholia,  and  short  notes,  Leipz.,  1820,  2  vols.  8vo,  reprinted  Lond., 
1823,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  of  Goller,  Leipz.,  1826,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  2d  edit.,  1836,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  the  first 
edition  of  which  was  reprinted  at  London,  1835,  in  1  vol.  8vo ;  of  Arnold,  Oxford,  1830- 
35,  3  vols.  8vo;  2d  edit.,  Oxford,  1840-42,  3  vols.;  3d  edit.s  with  copious  indexes,  Ox 
ford,  1847, 3  vols. ;  of  Bloomfield,  Lond.,  1830,  3  vols.  small  8vo  (school  edition),  enlarged 
and  reprinted,  Lond.,  1842,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  of  Hase,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca,  Paris,  1839 ;  of 
Kriiger,  with  grammatical  and  brief  explanatory  notes,  for  schools,  Berlin,  1846,  2 
vols.  8vo;  and  of  Poppo  (school  edition),  with  brief  notes,  Erfurt  and  Gotha,  1843-48, 
still  incomplete.  To  these  may  be  added  the  edition  of  Gail,  containing  the  Greek  text, 
the  scholia,  the  variations  of  thirteen  manuscripts  of  the  Bibliotheque  du  Roi,  a  Latin 
version  corrected,  and  a  French  version,  with  notes,  historical  and  philological,  Paris, 
1807-8, 12  vols.  8vo. 

Among  the  subsidiary  works  for  the  study  of  Thucydides  may  be  mentioned  "  Unter- 
suchungen  uber  das  Leben  des  Thucydides,"  Berlin,  1832,  by  Kriiger,  and  Dodwell's  "  An- 
nalKS  Thucydidci  ct  Xcnophontei,"  Oxford,  1702,  4to. 

1  OV-.,  Orator,  c.  <).  *  S/inlh,  Viet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  237 

V.  XENOPHON  (Eevo^aw/),1  the  Athenian,  was  the  son  of  Gryllus,  and  a 
native  of  the  demus  of  Ercheia.  The  only  extant  biography  of  him  is  by 
Diogenes  Laertius,  which,  as  usual,  is  carelessly  written ;  but  this  biog 
raphy  and  the  scattered  notices  of  ancient  writers,  combined  with  what 
may  be  collected  from  Xenophon's  own  works,  are  the  only  materials  for 
his  life.  There  is  no  direct  authority  either  for  the  time  of  Xenophon's 
birth  or  death,  but  these  dates  may  be  approximated  to  with  reasonable 
probability.  Laertius  and  Strabo2  state  that  Socrates  saved  Xenophon's 
life  at  the  battle  of  Delium,  B.C.  424,  a  fact  which  there  seems  no  reason 
for  rejecting,  and  from  which  it  may  be  inferred  that  Xenophon  was  born 
about  B.C.  444.  In  his  Heilenica,  he  mentions  the  assassination  of  Alex 
ander  of  Pherse,3  which  took  place  B.C.  357,4  and  Xenophon,  of  course, 
was  alive  in  that  year.  This  agrees  well  enough  with  Lucian's  state 
ment,5  that  Xenophon  attained  the  age  of  above  ninety.  There  has  been 
much  discussion,  also,  as  to  the  age  of  Xenophon  at  the  time  of  his  join 
ing  the  expedition  of  the  younger  Cyrus,  B.C.  401  ;  and  the  dispute  turns 
on  the  point  whether  he  was  then  a  young  man,  between  twenty  and 
thirty,  or  a  man  of  forty  and  upward.  Those  who  make  him  a  young 
man  must  reject  the  evidence  as  to  the  battle  of  Delium  ;  but  they  rely 
on  an  expression  in  the  Anabasis,6  where  he  is  called  veavicKos.  In  this 
passage,  however,  the  best  MSS.  read  "  Theopompus"  in  place  of  "  Xen 
ophon  ;"  and  it  may  also  be  remarked  that  the  term  veavto-Kos  was  not 
confined  to  young  men,  but  was  sometimes  applied  to  men  of  forty  at 
least.  Moreover,  Xenophon  seemed  to  Seuthes7  old  enough  to  have  a 
marriageable  daughter.  The  most  probable  conclusion,  then,  seems  to  be, 
that  Xenophon  was  not  under  forty  at  the  time  when  he  joined  the  army 
of  Cyrus. 

Xenophon  is  said  to  have  been  a  pupil  of  Socrates  at  an  early  age,  which 
is  consistent  with  the  intimacy  which  might  have  arisen  from  Socrates 
saving  his  life.  Philostratus  states  that  he  also  received  instruction  from 
Prodicus  of  Ceos,  during  the  time  that  he  was  a  prisoner  in  Bceotia,  but 
nothing  is  known  of  this  captivity  of  Xenophon  from  any  other  authority. 
Photius8  states  that  he  was  also  a  pupil  of  Isocrates,  which  may  be  true, 
though  Isocrates  was  younger  than  Xenophon,  having  been  born  in  B.C. 
436.  Another  question  connected  with  the  life  of  Xenophon  is  that  which 
has  reference  to  the  statement  of  Diogenes  Laertius,  namely,  that  Xen 
ophon  made  known  the  books  of  Thucydides,  which  were  then  unknown. 
This  point,  however,  has  been  already  considered  in  the  sketch  we  have 
just  given  of  the  life  of  Thucydides. 

In  B.C.  401  Xenophon  went  to  Sardes,  to  Cyrus  the  younger,  the  broth 
er  of  Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  king  of  Persia.  He  tells  us  himself,  in  the 
Anabasis,9  the  circumstances  under  which  he  went.  Proxenus,  Xeno 
phon's  friend,  was  then  with  Cyrus,  and  he  invited  Xenophon  to  come, 
and  promised  to  introduce  him  to  Cyrus.  Xenophon  took  the  advice  of 
Socrates,  who,  fearing  that  Xenophon  might  incur  the  displeasure  of  the 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  strab.,  p.  403.  3  Hellen.,  vi.,  4,  35. 

4  Diod.  Sic.,  xvi.,  14.  s  Macrob.,  21.  6  ii.,  1,  12.  ^  Anab.,  vii.^2,  8. 

8  Eiblioth.  Cod.,  cclx.  9  iii.,  1. 


238  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Athenians  if  he  attached  himself  to  Cyrus,  inasmuch  as  Cyrus  was  sup 
posed  to  have  given  the  Lacedaemonians  aid  in  their  recent  wars  against 
Athens,  advised  Xenophon  to  consult  the  oracle  of  Delphi.  Xenophon 
went  to  Delphi,  and  asked  Apollo  to  what  gods  he  should  sacrifice  and 
make  his  vows  in  order  to  secure  success  in  the  enterprise  which  he 
meditated.  The  god  gave  him  his  answer,  but  Socrates  blamed  him  for 
not  asking  whether  he  should  undertake  the  voyage  or  not.  However, 
as  he  had  obtained  an  answer  from  the  god,  Socrates  advised  him  to  go, 
and  accordingly  Xenophon  set  out  for  Sardes,  where  he  found  Cyrus  and 
Proxenus  just  ready  to  leave  the  city  on  an  expedition.  This  story  is 
characteristic  both  of  Socrates  and  Xenophon. 

It  was  given  out  by  Cyrus  that  his  expedition  was  against  the  Pisidi- 
ans,  and  all  the  Greeks  in  the  army  were  deceived,  except  Clearchus, 
who  was  alone  in  the  secret.  The  real  object  of  Cyrus  was  to  dethrone 
his  brother,  and,  after  advancing  a  short  distance,  this  became  apparent 
enough  to  his  Grecian  followers,  who,  however,  with  the  exception  of  a 
few,  determined  to  accompany  him.  After  a  long  march  through  Asia 
Minor,  Syria,  and  the  sandy  tract  east  of  the  Euphrates,  Cyrus  met  the 
vast  army 'of  the  Persians  in  the  plain  of  Cunaxa,  about  forty  miles  from 
Babylon.  In  the  affray  that  ensued,  for  it  was  not  a  battle,  Cyrus  lost 
his  life,  his  barbarian  troops  were  dispersed,  and  the  Greeks  were  left 
alone  on  the  wide  plains  between  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates.  It  was  after 
the  treacherous  massacre  of  Clearchus,  and  other  of  the  Greek  command 
ers,  by  the  Persian  satrap  Tissaphernes,  that  Xenophon  came  forwrard. 
He  had  held  no  command  in  the  army  of  Cyrus,  nor  had  he,  in  fact,  served 
as  a  soldier.  He  introduces  himself  to  our  notice,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
third  book  of  the  "Anabasis"  in  that  simple  manner  which  characterizes 
the  best  writers  of  antiquity.  From  this  time,  Xenophon  became  one  of 
the  most  active  leaders,  and  under  his  judicious  guidance  the  Greeks  ef 
fected  their  retreat  northward,  across  the  high  lands  of  Armenia,  and  ar 
rived  at  Trapezus  ( Trebisond),  a  Greek  colony,  on  the  southeastern  coast 
of  the  Euxine.  From  Trapezus  the  troops  were  conducted  to  Chryso- 
polis,  which  is  opposite  to  Byzantium.  The  Greeks  were  in  great  distress, 
and  some  of  them  under  Xenophon  entered  the  service  of  Seuthes,  king 
of  Thrace,  who  wanted  their  aid,  and  promised  to  pay  for  it.  The  Greeks 
performed  what  they  had  agreed  to  do,  but  Seuthes  was  unwilling  to  pay, 
and  it  was  with  great  difficulty  that  Xenophon  got  from  him  part  of  what 
he  had  promised.  The  description  which  Xenophon  gives  of  the  man 
ners  of  the  Thracians  is  very  curious  and  amusing.1  As  the  Lacedaemo 
nians  under  Thimbron  were  now  at  war  with  Tissaphernes  and  Pharna- 
bazus,  Xenophon  and  his  troops  were  invited  to  join  the  army  of  Thim 
bron,  which  was  done.  Before,  however,  they  joined  Thimbron,  Xeno 
phon,  who  was  very  poor,  led  them  on  an  expedition  into  the  plain  of  the 
Caicus,  to  plunder  the  house  and  property  of  a  Persian  named  Asidates. 
The  Persian,  with  his  women,  children,  and  all  his  movables,  was  seized ; 
and  Xenophon,  by  this  robbery,  replenished  his  empty  pockets.2  He  tells 
the  story  himself,  as  if  he  were  not  ashamed  of  it. 

»  Anab.,  vi.,  3,  seqq.  2  Ib.,  vii.,  8,  23. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  239 

It  is  uncertain  what  Xenophon  did  after  giving  up  the  troops  to  Thim- 
bron.  He  remarks,  just  before  he  speaks  of  leading  the  troops  back  into 
Asia,  that  he  had  not  yet  been  banished  ;  but  as  it  is  stated  by  various 
authorities  that  he  was  banished  by  the  "Athenians  because  he  joined  the 
expedition  of  Cyrus  against  the  Persian  king,  who  was  then  on  friendly 
terms  with  Athens,  it  is  most  probable  that  sentence  of  banishment  fol 
lowed  soon  after.  It  is  not  certain  what  he  did  after  the  troops  joined 
Thimbron.  The  assumption  of  Letronne  that  he  went  to  Athens  is  un 
supported  by  evidence. 

Agesilaus,  the  Spartan  king,  was  sent  with  an  army  into  Asia,  B.C. 
396,  and  Xenophon  was  with  him  during  the  whole,  or  a  part  at  least,  of 
this  Asiatic  expedition.  Agesilaus  was  recalled  to  Greece  B.C.  394,  and 
Xenophon  accompanied  him  on  his  return,1  and  he  was  with  Agesilaus  in 
the  battle  against  his  own  countrymen  at  Coronea.2  According  to  Plu 
tarch,  he  accompanied  Agesilaus  to  Sparta,  after  this  last  mentioned  bat 
tle,  and  shortly  after  settled  himself  at  Scillus,3  in  Elis,  near  Olympia,  on 
a  spot  which  the  Lacedaemonians  gave  him,  and  here,  it  is  said,  he  was 
joined  by  his  wife  and  children.  This  was  his  second  wife,  named  Phile- 
sia,  and  he  had  probably  married  her  in  Asia.  On  the  advice  of  Agesi 
laus,4  he  sent  his  sons  to  Sparta  to  be  educated.  Thus  Xenophon  had 
become  an  exile  from  his  country  for  an  act  of  treason,  or  what  was 
equivalent  to  treason  :  he  had  received  a  present  of  land  from  the  Lace 
daemonians,  the  enemies  of  the  Athenians ;  and  he  was  educating  his  chil 
dren  in  Spartan  usages. 

From  this  time  Xenophon  took  no  part  in  public  affairs.  His  time,  dur 
ing  his  long  residence  at  Scillus,  wras  employed  in  hunting,  entertaining 
his  friends,  and  in  writing  some  of  his  later  works.  Diogenes  Laertius 
states  that  he  wrote  here  his  histories,  by  which  he  must  mean  the  -•  Ana 
basis"  and  the  "  Hellenica,"  and  probably  the  "  Cyropsedia."  Here  also 
he  probably  wrote  the  treatise  on  "  Hunting,"  and  that  on  "  Horseman 
ship."  The  history  of  the  remainder  of  his  life  is  some\vhat  doubtful. 
T3iogenes  says  that  the  Eleans  sent  a  force  against  Scillus,  and,  as  the 
Lacedaemonians  did  not  come  to  the  aid  of  Xenophon,  they  seized  the 
place.  Xenophon's  sons,  with  some  slaves,  made  their  escape  to  Lepre- 
um,  a  town  of  Elis,  near  the  confines  of  Arcadia  and  Messenia.  Xeno 
phon  himself  first  went  to  Elis,  the  capital,  for  what  purpose  it  is  not  said, 
and  then  to  Lepreum  to  meet  his  children.  At  last  he  withdrew  to  Cor 
inth,  and  probably  died  there.  The  time  of  his  expulsion  from  Scillus  is 
uncertain.  Kriiger  conjectures  that  the  Eleans  took  Scillus  not  earlier 
than  B.C.  371,  in  which  year  the  Lacedaemonians  were  defeated  at  Leuc- 
tra.  Letronne,  however,  fixes  the  date  at  B.C.  368,  and  considers  it  very 
probable  that  the  Eleans  invaded  Scillus  at  the  time  when  the  Lacede 
monians  were  most  engaged  with  the  Theban  war,  which  would  be  dur 
ing  the  invasion  of  Laconia  by  Epaminondas.  Xenophon  must  have  lived 
above  twenty  years  at  Scillus,  if  the  date  of  his  expulsion  from  that  place 
is  not  before  the  year  B.C.  37 1.5 

1  Anab.,  v.,  3,  6.  2  Pint.,  Ages.,  18.  3  Anab.,  v.,  3,  7. 

1  Pint..  Ages.,  20.  s  Smith,  I.  c. 


240  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

The  sentence  of  banishment  against  Xenophon  was  revoked  by  a  de 
cree  proposed  by  Eubulus  ;  but  the  date  of  this  decree  is  uncertain.  Be 
fore  the  battle  of  Mantinea,  in  B.C.  362,  the  Athenians  had  joined  the 
Spartans  against  the  Thebans.  'Upon  this  Xenophon  sent  his  two  sons, 
Gryllus  and  Diodorus,  to  Athens,  to  fight  on  the  Spartan  side  against  the 
Thebans.  Gryllus  fell  in  the  battle  of  Mantinea,  in  which  the  Theban 
general  Epaminondas  also  lost  his  life,  and,  according  to  one  account,  by 
the  hand  of  Gryllus  himself.  No  reason  is  assigned  by  any  ancient  writer 
for  Xenophon's  not  returning  to  Athens ;  for,  in  thfe  absence  of  direct  ev 
idence  as  to  his  return,  we  must  conclude  that  he  did  not.  Several  of 
his  works  were  written  or  completed  after  the  revocation  of  his  sentence : 
the  "  Hipparchicus,"  the  Epilogus  to  the  Cyropaedia,  if  we  assume  that 
his  sentence  was  revoked  before  B.C.  362  ;  and  the  treatise  on  the  "Rev 
enues  of  Athens."  Stesiclides,  quoted  by  Diogenes,  places  the  death  of 
Xenophon  in  B.C.  359 ;  but  there  is  much  uncertainty  on  this  head.  Prob 
ably  he  died  a  few  years  after  B.C.  359.1 

The  extant  works  of  Xenophon  may  be  divided  into  four  classes  :  His 
torical,  comprising  the  "  Anabasis,"  the  "  Hellenica,"  the  "  Cyropaedia" 
(which,  however,  is  not  strictly  historical),  and  the  "  Life  of  Agesilaus." 
Didactic,  comprising  the  "  Hipparchicus,"  the  treatise  on  "  Horseman 
ship,"  and  that  on  "  Hunting."  Political,  comprising  the  works  on  the 
"  Republics  of  Sparta  and  of  Athens,"  and  the  "  Revenues  of  Athens." 
Philosophical,  comprising  the  "  Memorabilia  of  Socrates,"  the  "  CEconomi- 
cus,"  the  "  Symposium  or  Banquet,"  the  "  Hiero,"  and  the  "  Apology  of 
Socrates."  There  are  also  extant  certain  letters  attributed  to  Xenophon, 
but,  like  many  other  ancient  productions  of  the  same  class,  they  are  not 
genuine.  The  works  of  Xenophon,  as  enumerated  by  Diogenes,  agree 
exactly  with  those  which  are  extant,  and  we  may  therefore  conclude  that 
we  have  at  least  as  many  works  as  Xenophon  published,  though  all  of 
them  may  not  be  genuine.  It  is  true  that  Diogenes2  says  that  Xenophon 
wrote  about  forty  books  (/8i/3Aia),  but  he  adds  that  they  were  variously 
divided,  from  which  expression,  and  the  list  that  he  gives,  it  is  certain 
that  by  the  word  frifixia  he  intends  to  reckon  the  several  divisions  or 
books,  as  we  call  them,  of  the  Anabasis,  Hellenica,  Cyropaedia,  and  Me 
morabilia,  as  distinct  /3z£Ai'a,  and  thus  we  have  in  the  whole  the  number 
of  thirty-eight,  which  is  near  enough  to  forty. 

We  will  now  proceed  to  give  a  more  particular  account  of  the  several 
works  of  Xenophon  already  mentioned,  observing  the  same  order  that 
has  just  been  given. 

HISTORICAL     WORKS     OF     XENOPHON. 

1.  The  Anabasis  ('kvafraffis),  in  seven  books,  is  the  work  by  which 
Xenophon  is  best  known.  It  contains  the  history  of  the  expedition  of 
the  younger  Cyrus  against  his  brother  Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  and  the  re 
treat  of  the  Greeks  who  formed  part  of  his  army.  The  first  book  com 
prises  the  march  of  Cyrus  to  the  neighborhood  of  Babylon,  and  ends  with 
his  death  at  the  battle  of  Cunaxa.  The  six  remaining  books  contain  the 
i  Smith,  I.  c.  2  I>iog.  Laert.,  ii.,  6,  57. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  241 

account  of  the  retreat  of  the  "  Ten  Thousand,"  as  the  Greek  army  is  often 
called.  The  work  is  written  in  an  easy,  agreeable  style,  and  gives  a  great 
deal  of  curious  information  respecting  the  country  traversed  by  the  Greeks, 
and  the  manners  of  the  people.  It  is  full  of  interest  also  as  being  a  mi 
nute  detail  by  an  eye-witness  of  the  hazards  and  adventures  of  the  army 
in  their  difficult  march  through  an  unknown  and  hostile  country.  The 
impression  which  it  makes  is  favorable  to  the  writer's  veracity  and  his 
practical  good  sense  ;  but  as  a  history  of  military  operations  it  is  as  much 
inferior  to  the  only  work  of  antiquity  with  which  it  can  be  compared,  the 
"  Commentaries  of  Caesar,"  as  the  writer  himself  falls  short  of  the  lofty 
genius  of  the  great  Roman  commander.  Indeed,  those  passages  in  the 
Anabasis  which  relate  directly  to  the  movements  of  the  retreating  army 
are  not  always  clear,  nor  have  we  any  evidence  that  Xenophon  did  pos 
sess  any  military  talent  for  great  operations,  whatever  skill  he  may  have 
had  as  a  commander  of  a  division. 

2.  The  Hellenlca  ('E\\f]viKa),  or  Greek  history,  divided  into  seven  books, 
and  comprehending  the  space  of  forty-eight  years,  from  the  time  when 
the  history  of  Thucydides  ends  to  the  battle  of  Mantinea,  B.C.  362.  As, 
however,  the  assassination  of  Alexander  of  Pherae,  which  took  place  B.C. 
357,  is  mentioned  in  this  work,1  some  have  supposed  that  a  portion  of 
the  Hellenica  was  written  at  a  later  period  than  the  rest,  and  perhaps 
not  published  till  after  Xenophon's  death,  by  his  son  Diodorus,  or  his 
grandson  Gryllus.  There  is  no  need,  however,  of  any  such  hypothesis, 
since  the  mention  of  the  death  of  Alexander  of  Pherae  would  only  prove 
that  Xenophon  had  the  work  a  long  time  under  his  hands.  The  "  Helle 
nica"  has  little  merit  as  a  history.  The  author  was  altogether  deficient 
in  that  power  of  reflection  and  of  penetrating  into  the  motives  of  action 
which  characterize  the  great  work  of  Thucydides.  Itis,  in  general,  adry 
narrative  of  events,  and  contains  little  to  move  or  affect,  with  the  excep 
tion  of  a  few  incidents  which  are  given  with  more  than  the  usual  detail. 
The  parts  also  are  not  treated  in  their  due  proportions,  and  many  im 
portant  events  are  passed  over  briefly.  This,  the  only  proper  historical 
work  of  Xenophon,  does  not  entitle  him  to  the  praise  of  being  a  good  his 
torical  writer.  It  may  be  urged  that  the  work  was  only  a  kind  of  Me- 
moires  pour  servir,  as  some  have  supposed ;  but  if  it  is  to  be  taken  as  a 
continuation  of  Thucydides,  it  is  a  history,  and  as  such  it  has  been  re 
garded  both  in  ancient  and  modern  times. 

3.  The  Cyropadm  (Kvpov  TratSe/a),  in  eight  books,  is  a  kind  of  political 
romance,  in  which  the  ethical  element  prevails ;  but,  since  it  is  based 
upon  the  history  of  Cyrus,  the  founder  of  the  Persian  monarchy,  it  is 
commonly  ranked  among  the  historical  works  of  Xenophon.  Its  object 
is  to  show  how  citizens  can  be  formed  to  be  virtuous  and  brave,  and  to 
exhibit  also  a  model  of  a  wise  and  good  governor.  Xenophon  chooses 
for  his  exemplar  Cyrus,  the  founder  of  the  Persian  empire,  and  the  Per 
sians  are  his  models  of  men  who  are  brought  up  in  a  true  discipline.  The 
work  has  no  authority  whatever  as  a  history,  nor  is  it  even  authority  for 
the  usages  of  the  Persians,  some  of  which  we  know,  from  other  writers, 
»  vi.,  4,  35. 

L 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 

to  have  been  different  from  what  they  are  represented  to  be  by  Xenophon. 
The  writer  borrows  his  materials  from  the  Grecian  states,  and  especially 
from  Lacedaemon,  and  the  "  Cyropaedia"  is  one  of  the  many  proofs  of  his 
aversion  to  the  usages  and  the  political  constitution  of  his  native  city. 
The  genuineness  of  the  Epilogus,  or  conclusion  of  the  work,  has  been 
doubted  by  some  critics.  Its  object  is  to  show  that  the  Persians  had 
greatly  degenerated  since  the  time  of  Cyrus.  The  "  Cyropaedia"  is  one 
of  the  most  labored  of  Xenophon's  works,  and  contains  his  views  on  the 
training  of  youth,  and  of  the  character  of  a  perfect  prince.  It  is  an 
agreeable  exposition  of  principles  under  the  form  of  a  history,  and,  like 
Xenophon's  other  treatises,  it  contains  more  of  plain,  practical  precepts, 
founded  on  observation  and  supported  by  good  sense,  than  any  profound 
views.  The  dying  speech  of  Cyrus  is  worthy  of  a  pupil  of  Socrates.1 

4.  The  Agesildus  ('ATTjo-tAaos)  is  a  panegyric  on  Xenophon's  friend,  the 
Lacedaemonian  king,  and  forms  another  proof  of  his  Spartan  predilections. 
Cicero2  says  that  he  has  in  this  panegyric  surpassed  all  the  statues  that 
have  been  raised  in  honor  of  kings.  Some  modern  critics,  howrever,  do 
not  consider  the  extant  work  as  deserving  of  high  praise,  to  which  it 
may  be  replied  that  it  will  be  difficult  to  find  a  panegyric  which  is.  It  is 
a  kind  of  composition  in  which  failure  can  hardly  be  avoided.  However 
true  it  may  be,  it  is  apt  to  be  insipid,  and  to  appear  exaggerated. 

DIDACTIC     WORKS     OF     XENOPHON. 


1  .  The  Hipparchicus  ('iTnrapxiK^s)  is  a  treatise  on  the  duties  of  a  com 
mander  of  cavalry  ('{Tnrapxos),  and  contains  many  military  precepts,  espe 
cially  for  the  choice  of  cavalry  men.  One  would  be  inclined  to  suppose 
that  it  was  written  at  Athens,  but  this  conclusion,  like  many  others  from 
internal  evidence,  is  not  satisfactory.  A  strain  of  devotion  runs  through 
the  treatise,  called  forth,  as  the  writer  himself  states  in  the  conclusion  of 
the  work,  by  a  view  of  the  many  dangers  with  which  the  career  of  arms 
is  beset. 

2.  The  treatise  on  Horsemanship  ('Iirirucfi)  was  written  after  the  "  Hip 
parchicus,"  to  which  reference  is  made  at  the  end  of  the  present  work. 
The  author  says  that  he  has  had  much  experience  as  a  horseman,  and  is 
therefore  qualified  to  give  instruction  to  others.     He  speaks  at  the  begin 
ning  of  a  work  on  the  subject  by  Simon,  in  whose  opinions  he  coincides, 
and  he  professes  to  supply  some  of  his  omissions.     This  Simon  was  a 
writer  on  horses,  to  whom  several  ancient  authors  refer,  and  in  such  a 
way  as  to  show  that  he  was  quite  an  authority  in  such  matters.     His  ex 
act  date  is  not  known,  but  he  was  not  earlier  than  the  painter  Micon, 
who  lived  about  B.C.  460,  for  he  criticised  the  works  of  that  artist. 

3.  The  Cynegeticus  (KwnyeTiK6s)  is  a  treatise  on  hunting,  an  amuse 
ment  of  which  Xenophon  was  very  fond  ;  and  on  the  dog,  and  the  breed 
ing  and  training  of  dogs,  on  the  various  kinds  of  game,  and  the  mode  of 
taking  them.     It  is  a  treatise  written  by  a  genuine  sportsman,  who  loved 
the  exercise  and  the  excitement  of  the  chase,  and  it  may  be  read  with 
delight  by  any  sportsman  who  deserves  the  name. 

1  Cyrop.,  viii.,  7.     Compare  Or.,  Df  Ken.,  22.  a  Ep.  ad  Fam.,  v..  12. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  243 

4.  Two  treatises  on  the  "  Republics  of  Sparta  and  of  Athens"  (Aa/ceScu- 
noviaj/  UoXiTeia,  5A07ji/cua>i/  IIoAiTeia).     These  were  not  always  recognized 
as  genuine  works  of  Xenophon  even  by  the  ancients.     They  pass,  how 
ever,  under  his  name,  and  there  is  nothing  in  the  internal  evidence  that 
appears  to  throw  any  doubt  upon  the  authorship.     The  writer  clearly 
prefers  the  Spartan  to  the  Athenian  institutions. 

5.  A  treatise  on  the  "  Revenues"  of  Athens  (U6poi,  7)  irepl  Upos6Sci>v). 
This  has  for  its  object  to  show  how  the  revenues  of  Athens,  and  espe 
cially  those  derived  from  the  mines,  may  be  improved  by  better  manage 
ment,  and  made  sufficient  for  the  maintenance  of  the  poor  citizens,  and 
for  all  other  purposes,  without  requiring  contributions  from  the  allies  and 
subject  states.     The  matter  of  this  treatise  is  discussed  by  Bockh,  in  his 
work  on  the  Public  Economy  of  Athens. 

PHILOSOPHICAL     WORKS     OF     XENOPHON. 

1.  The  Memorabilia  of  Socrates  (iATro^vrj/j.ov€v/j.ara  ^uKpdrovs),  in  four 
books,  contains  a  defence  of  the  memory  of  Socrates  against  the  charge 
of  irreligion,  and  of  corrupting  the  Athenian  youth.1     Socrates  is  repre 
sented  as  holding  a  series  of  conversations,  in  which  he  develops  and 
inculcates  moral  doctrines  in  his  peculiar  fashion.     It  is  entirely  a  prac 
tical  work,  such  as  we  might  expect  from  the  practical  nature  of  Xeno- 
phon's  mind,  and  it  professes  to  exhibit  Socrates  as  he  taught.     It  is  true 
that  it  may  exhibit  only  one  side  of  the  Socratic  argumentation,  and  that 
it  does  not  deal  in  those  subtleties  and  verbal  disputes  which  occupy  so 
large  a  space  in  some  of  Plato's  dialogues.     Xenophon  was  a  hearer  of 
Socrates,  an  admirer  of  his  master,  and  anxious  to  defend  his  memory ; 
and  hence,  as  he  certainly  had  no  pretensions  himself  to  originality  as  a 
thinker,  we  may  assume  that  the  matter  of  the  "  Memorabilia"  is  genu 
ine,  that  the  author  has  exhibited  a  portion  of  the  moral  and  intellectual 
character  of  Socrates,  such  part  as  he  was  able  to  appreciate,  or  such  as 
suited  his  taste,  and  that  we  have  in  this  work  as  genuine  a  picture  of 
Socrates  as  his  pupil  Xenophon  could  make.     That  it  is  a  genuine  ex 
hibition  of  the  man  is  indisputable,  and  it  is  the  most  valuable  memorial 
that  we  have  of  the  practical  philosophy  of  Socrates.     On  the  other  hand, 
the  "  Memorabilia"  will  always  be  undervalued  by  the  lovers  of  the  tran 
scendental,  who  give  to  an  unintelligible  jargon  of  words  the  name  of 
philosophy.     It  comes  too  near  the  common  understanding  (communis 
sensus)  of  mankind  to  be  valued  by  those  who  would  raise  themselves 
above  this  common  understanding,  and  who  have  yet  to  learn  that  there 
is  not  a  single  notion  of  philosophy  which  is  not  expressed  or  involved  by 
implication  in  the  common  language  of  life.2 

2.  The  (Economicus  (OiKovofj.iK6s)  is  a  dialogue  between  Socrates  and 
Critobulus,  in  which  Socrates  begins  by  showing  that  there  is  an  art 
called  (Economic  (OiWojtu/dj),  which  relates  to  the  administration  of  a 
household  and  of  a  man's  property.     Socrates,  when  speaking  in  praise 
of  agriculture,  quotes  the  instance  of  the  younger  Cyrus,  who  was  fond 
of  horticulture,  and  once  showed  to  the  Spartan  Lysander  the  gardens 

1  Mem.,  i.,  1.  2  Smith,  I.  c. 


244 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


which  he  had  planned,  and  the  trees  which  he  had  planted  with  his  own 
hands.  Cicero  copies  this  passage  in  his  treatise  on  Old  Age.1  In  an 
swer  to  the  praises  of  agriculture,  Critobulus  speaks  of  the  losses  to 
which  the  husbandman  is  exposed  from  hail,  frost,  drought,  and  other 
causes.  The  answer  of  Socrates  is,  that  the  husbandman  must  trust  in 
Heaven,  and  worship  the  gods.  The  seventh  chapter  is  on  the  duty  of 
a  good  wife,  as  exemplified  in  the  case  of  the  wife  of  Ischomachus.  This 
is  one  of  the  best  treatises  of  Xenophon. 

3.  The  Symposium  (^v^ffiov),  or  Banquet  of  Philosophers,  contains  a 
delineation  of  the  character  of  Socrates.     The  speakers  are  supposed  to 
meet  at  the  house  of  Callias,  a  rich  Athenian,  at  the  celebration  of  the 
great  Panathenaea.     Socrates,  Critobulus,  Antisthenes,  Charmides,  and 
others,  are  the  speakers.    The  accessories  of  the  entertainment  are  man 
aged  with  skill,  and  the  piece  is  interesting  as  a  picture  of  an  Athenian 
drinking  party,  and  of  the  amusement  and  conversation  with  which  it 
was  diversified.     The  nature  of  love  and  friendship  is  discussed.     Some 
critics  think  that  the  Symposium  is  a  juvenile  performance,  and  that  the 
Symposium  of  Plato  was  written  after  that  of  Xenophon  ;  but  it  is  an  old 
tradition  that  the  Symposium  of  Plato  was  written  before  that  of  Xenophon. 

4.  The  Hiero  ('Iepo>i/  %  Tvpavvi^s)  is  a  dialogue  between  King  Hiero 
and  Simonides,  in  which  the  king  speaks  of  the  dangers  and  difficulties 
incident  to  an  exalted  station,  and  the  superior  happiness  of  a  private  man. 
The  poet,  on  the  other  hand,  enumerates  the  advantages  which  the  pos 
session  of  power  gives,  and  the  means  which  it  affords  of  obliging  and 
doing  services.     Hiero  speaks  of  the  burden  of  power,  and  answers  Si 
monides,  who  wonders  why  a  man  should  keep  that  which  is  so  trouble 
some,  by  saying  that  power  is  a  thing  which  a  man  can  not  safely  lay 
down.     Simonides  offers  some  suggestions  as  to  the  best  use  of  power, 
and  the  way  of  employing  it  for  the  public  interest.     It  is  suggested  by 
Letronne  that  Xenophon  may  have  been  induced  to  write  this  treatise  by 
what  he  saw  at  the  court  of  Dionysius,  since  there  is  a  story  of  his  hav 
ing  visited  Sicily  in  the  lifetime  of  the  tyrant  of  Syracuse. 

5.  The  Apology  of  Socrates  (5A7roA.oyta  Sw/cparows  irpbs  TOVS  StKacrrds}  is 
not,  as  the  title  imports,  the  defence  which  Socrates  made  on  his  trial, 
but  it  contains  the  reasons  which  determined  him  to  prefer  death  rather 
than  to  humble  himself  by  asking  for  his  life  from  his  prejudiced  judges. 
Valckenaer  and  others  do  not  allow  this  to  be  Xenophon's  work,  because 
they  consider  it  to  be  unworthy  of  him.     But,  if  a  man  is  to  lose  the  dis 
credit  of  a  bad  work  simply  because  he  has  written  better,  many  persons 
may  disown  their  own  books.    The  "  Apology"  is  certainly  a  trivial  per 
formance,  but  Xenophon  did  write  an  "  Apology,"  according  to  Diogenes 
Laertius,,  and  this  may  be  it, 

A  man's  character  can  not  be  entirely  derived  from  his  writings,  espe 
cially  if  they  treat  of  exact  science.  Yet  a  man's  writings  are  some  in 
dex  of  his  character,  and,  when  they  are  of  a  popular  and  varied  kind, 
not  a  bad  index.  From  the  brief  sketch  which  we  have  given  here  of  his 
life  and  writings,  some  estimate  may  be  easily  formed  of  the  general 
i  De  Senect.,  17. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  245 

character  of  Xenophon.  As  we  know  him  from  his  writings,  he  was  a 
humane  man,  at  least  for  his  age ;  a  man  of  good  understanding  and 
strong  religious  feelings  :  we  might  call  him,  indeed,  superstitious,  if  the 
name  superstition  had  a  well-defined  meaning.  Some  modern  critics  find 
much  to  object  to  in  Xenophon's  conduct  as  a  citizen.  He  did  not  like 
Athenian  institutions  altogether ;  but  a  man  is  under  no  moral  or  political 
obligation  to  like  the  government  under  which  he  is  born.  His  duty  is  to 
conform  to  it,  or  to  withdraw  himself.  There  is  no  evidence  that  Xeno 
phon,  after  his  banishment,  acted  against  his  native  country,  even  at  the 
battle  of  Coronea.  If  his  preference  of  Spartan  to  Athenian  institutions 
is  matter  for  blame,  he  is  blamable  indeed.  His  philosophy  was  the  prac 
tical:  it  had  reference  to  actual  life,  and  in  all  practical  matters,  and 
every  thing  that  concerns  the  ordinary  conduct  of  human  life,  he  shows 
good  sense  and  honorable  feeling.1 

As  a  writer,  he  deserves  the  praise  of  perspicuity  and  ease,  and  for 
these  qualities  he  has  in  all  ages  been  justly  admired.  As  an  historical 
writer,  he  is  infinitely  below  Thucydides  :  he  had  no  depth  of  reflection, 
no  great  insight  into  the  fundamental  principles  of  society.  His  Hcllenica, 
his  only  historical  effort,  would  not  have  preserved  his  name,  except  for 
the  importance  of  the  facts  which  this  work  contains,  and  the  deficiency 
of  other  historical  records.  His  mind  was  not  adapted  for  pure  philo 
sophical  speculation  :  he  looked  to  the  practical  in  all  things,  and  the  ba 
sis  of  his  philosophy  was  a  strong  belief  in  a  divine  mediation  in  the  gov 
ernment  of  the  world.  His  belief  only  required  a  little  correction  and 
modification  to  allow  us  to  describe  it  as  a  profound  conviction  that  God, 
in  the  constitution  of  things,  has  given  a  moral  government  to  the  world, 
as  manifestly  as  he  has  given  laws  for  the  mechanical  and  chemical  ac 
tions  of  matter,  the  organization  of  plants  and  animals,  and  the  vital  en 
ergies  of  all  beings  that  live  and  move.2 

EDITIONS    OF    XENOPHON. 

There  are  numerous  editions  of  the  whole  and  of  the  separate  works  of  Xenophon. 
The  Hcllenica,  the  first  of  Xenophon's  works  that  appeared  in  type,  was  printed  at  Ven 
ice,  1503,  fol.,  by  the  elder  Aldus,  with  the  title  of  Paralipomena,  and  as  a  supplement 
to  Thucydides,  which  had  been  printed  the  year  before.  The  first  general  edition  is  that 
of  Boninus,  printed  by  Giunta,  and  dedicated  to  Leo  X.,  Florence,  1516,  fol. ;  but  this 
edition  does  not  contain  the  "  Agesilaus,"  the  "Apology,"  and  the  treatise  on  the  "Rev 
enues  of  Athens."  A  part  of  the  treatise  on  the  "Athenian  Republic"  is  also  wanting. 
This  edition  of  Giunta  is  a  very  good  specimen  of  early  printing,  and  useful  to  an  edi 
tor  of  Xenophon.  The  edition  by  Andrea  of  Asola,  printed  by  Aldus,  at  Venice,  1525, 
fol.,  contains  all  the  works  of  Xenophon,  except  the  "  Apology  ;"  though  the  "  Apology" 
was  already  edited  by  Reuchlin,  Hagenau,  1520,  4to,  with  the  "  Agesilaus  and  Hiero." 
The  Basle  edition,  printed  by  Brylinger,  1545,  fol.,  is  the  first  edition  of  the  Greek  text 
with  a  Latin  translation.  The  edition  of  II.  Stephens,  1561,  fol.,  contains  an  amended 
text,  and  the  edition  of  1581  has  a  Latin  version.  After  these  editions  we  may  name  the 
following :  that  of  Leunclavius,  or  Loewenklau,  Basle,  1569,  reprinted  at  the  same  place 
in  1572,  and  at  Frankfort  in  1694,  fol. ;  of  Wells,  Oxford,  5  vols.  8vo,  with  DodwelJ's 
Chronologia  Xenophontea ;  reprinted  with  additions,  Lips.,  1763-64,  4  vols.  8vo,  under  the 
editorial  care  of  Thieme,  with  a  preface  by  Ernesti ;  and  again  in  1801-4,  under  the  su 
perintendence  of  Sturz  ;  of  Weiske,  Leipzig,  1798-1804,  6  vols.  8vo  ;  of  Schneider,  Leip 
zig,  1815,  6  vols.  8vo  (of  which  the  first,  second,  and  fourth  volumes  have  been  re-edited 
1  Smith,  I.  c.  3  j(t  n 


246  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

and  much  improved  by  Bornemann,  containing,  the  first,  the  Cyropasdia,  Leipzig,  1838 ; 
the  second,  the  Anabasis,  1825 ;  the  fourth,  the  Memorabilia,  1829  ;  and  the  sixth,  con 
taining  the  Opuscula  politico,  equestria,  venatica,  by  Sauppe,  1838) ;  of  Dindorf,  in  Didot's 
Bibliotheca,  Paris,  1838.  An  edition  was  commenced  in  the  Bibliotheca  Grceca  of  Jacobs 
and  Rost,  Gotha,  1828,  of  which  there  have  appeared,  vol.  i.,  Cyrop&dia,  by  Borneraann, 
1828;  vol.  ii.,  Memorabilia,  by  Kuhner,  1841 ;  vol.  iii.,  Anabasis,  by  Kuhner,  1852;  and 
vol.  iv.,  QZconomicus,  Agesilaus,  and  Hiero,  by  Breitenbach,  1842,  scqq.  The  most  pre 
tending  edition  of  the  works  of  Xenophon  is  that  of  Gail,  with  a  Latin  and  a  French  ver 
sion,  critical  and  explanatory  notes,  maps  and  plans,  &c.,  Paris,  1797-1814,  7  vols.  4to. 
The  seventh  volume  consists  of  three  parts,  one  of  which  (published  in  1808)  contains 
the  various  readings  of  three  MSS. ;  a  second  (1814)  contains  the  notices  of  the  MSS., 
and  observations  literary  and  critical ;  and  the  third  an  atlas  of  maps  and  plans.  Le- 
tronne,  an  excellent  judge,  as  all  scholars  know,  bestows  very  moderate  praise  upon  this 
edition.  Gail  has  kept  to  the  old  text,  and  has  made  no  use  of  his  various  readings  for 
improving  it.  The  notes,  however,  are  generally  useful  for  the  understanding  of  Xen 
ophon. 

The  best  editions  of  detached  portions  of  the  works  of  Xenophon  are  the  following  : 
of  the  Cyropadia,  by  Poppo,  Leipzig,  1821,  8vo,  and  by  Jacobitz,  Leipz.,  1843  ;  of  the  Ana 
basis,  by  Lion,  Gottingen,  1822,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  by  L.  Dindorf,  Leipzig,  1826,  8vo  ;  by  Krii- 
ger,  Halle,  1826,  8vo,  last  (3d)  school  edition,  1851  ;  by  Poppo,  Leipzig,  1827,  8vo  ;  by 
Constantine  Matthiae,  Quedlinburg,  1852,  8vo  (school  ed.)  ;  of  the  Symposium  and  Apolo 
gia,  by  Bornemann,  Leipzic,  1824,  8vo  ;  of  the  Symposium,  by  Herbst,  Halle,  1830;  by 
Mehler,  Lugd.  Ba't.,  1850  ;  of  the  Memorabilia,  by  Sauppe,  Leipz.,  1834  ;  by  Herbst,  Halle, 
1827,  8vo  ;  by  Kuhner,  Gotha,  1841,  8vo  ;  of  the  De  Republica  Lacedoemoniorum,  by  Haase, 
Berlin,  1833 ;  of  the  Hellenica,  from  the  text  of  Dindorf,  with  selected  notes,  at  the  Uni 
versity  press,  Oxford,  1831 ;  of  the  Hiero  and  Agesilaus,  by  Hanow,  Halle,  1835;  of  the 
Agesilaus,  by  Baumgarten-Crusius,  Leipzig,  1812  (new  ed.).  There  is  also  a  separate 
volume  of  commentary  on  the  Cyropcedia  by  Fischer,  edited  by  Kuinoel,  Leipzig,  1803. 
As  a  very  useful  auxiliary  in  the  perusal  of  Xenophon,  we  may  mention  the  Lexicon  Xen- 
ophonteum  of  Sturz,  4  vols.  8vo,  Leipzig,  1801-1804. 

III.  CTESIAS  (KrTja-tas)1  was  a  native  of  Cnidus,  in  Caria,  and  a  con 
temporary  of  Xenophon.  He  was  by  profession  a  physician,  and  belonged 
to  the  caste  or  family  of  the  Asclepiadae,  whose  principal  seats  were  at 
Cnidus  and  Cos.  Ctesias  lived  for  seventeen  years  in  Persia,  at  the 
court  of  Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  as  private  physician  to  the  king.2  Diodo- 
rus  says  that  he  was  made  prisoner  by  the  king,  and  that,  owing  to  his 
great  skill  in  medicine,  he  was  afterward  drawn  to  the  court,  and  was 
highly  honored  there.3  When  he  was  thus  made  prisoner  we  are  not  in 
formed  ;  some  critics  think  that  it  was  at  the  battle  of  Cunaxa,  B.C.  401 ; 
but  if  Ctesias  remained  seventeen  years  in  Persia,  as  Diodorus  says,  and 
if,  as  the  same  writer  informs  us,  he  returned  to  his  native  country  in 
B.C.  398,  it  follows  that  he  must  have  gone  to  Persia  long  before  the  battle 
of  Cunaxa,  that  is,  about  B.C.  415.  How  long  he  survived  his  return  to 
his  native  city  is  unknown. 

During  his  stay  in  Persia,  Ctesias  gathered  all  the  information  that 
was  attainable  in  that  country,  and  wrote,  1 .  A  great  work  on  the  history 
of  Persia,  entitled  He/xn/cd,  with  the  view  of  giving  his  countrymen  a 
more  accurate  knowledge  of  that  empire  than  they  possessed,  and  to  re 
fute  the  errors  current  in  Greece,  which  had  arisen  partly  from  ignorance 
and  partly  from  the  national  vanity  of  the  Greeks.  The  materials  for  his 
history,  so  far  as  he  did  not  describe  events  of  which  he  had  been  an  eye 
witness,  he  derived,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Diodorus,  from  the 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  656.  3  Diod.  Sic.,  ii.,  32. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  247 

Persian  archives  (SttyOepcu  f}affi\iKai),  or  the  official  history  of  the  Persian 
empire,  which  was  written  in  accordance  with  a  law  of  the  country. 
This  important  work  of  Ctesias  was  written,  like  that  of  Herodotus,  in 
the  Ionic  dialect,  and  consisted  of  twenty-three  books.  The  first  six  con 
tained  the  history  of  the  great  Assyrian  monarchy,  down  to  the  founda 
tion  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  Strabo  speaks 
of  Ctesias  as  crvyypdtyas  ra  'AffffvpiaKa  /ecu  ra  IlepcriKa.1  The  next  seven 
books  contained  the  history  of  Persia  down  to  the  end  of  the  reign  of 
Xerxes,  and  the  remaining  ten  carried  the  history  down  to  the  time  when 
Ctesias  left  Persia,  that  is,  to  the  year  B.C.  398.2  The  form  and  style 
of  this  work  were  of  considerable  merit,  and  its  loss  may  be  regarded  as 
one  of  the  most  serious  for  the  history  of  the  East.3  All  that  is  now  ex 
tant  of  it  is  a  meagre  abridgment  in  Photius,4  and  a  number  of  fragments 
which  are  preserved  in  Diodorus,  Athenaeus,  Plutarch,  and  others.  Of 
the  first  portion,  which  contained  the  history  of  Assyria,  there  is  no 
abridgment  in  Photius,  and  all  we  possess  of  that  part  is  contained  in 
the  second  book  of  Diodorus,  which  seems  to  be  taken  almost  entirely 
from  Ctesias.  There  we  find  that  the  accounts  of  Ctesias,  especially  in 
their  chronology,  differ  considerably  from  those  of  Berosus,  who  likewise 
derived  his  information  from  Eastern  sources.  These  discrepancies  can 
only  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  the  annals  used  by  the  two  historians 
were  written  in  different  places  and  under  different  circumstances.  The 
chronicles  used  by  Ctesias  were  written  by  official  persons,  and  those 
used  by  Berosus  were  the  work  of  priests  ;  both,  therefore,  were  written 
from  a  different  point  of  view,  and  neither  was,  perhaps,  strictly  true  in 
all  its  details. 

The  part  of  Ctesias's  work  which  contained  the  history  of  Persia,  that 
is,  from  the  sixth  book  to  the  end,  is  somewhat  better  known  from  the 
extracts  which  Photius  made  from  it,  and  which  are  still  extant.  Here, 
again,  Ctesias  is  frequently  at  variance  with  other  Greek  writers,  especially 
with  Herodotus.  To  account  for  this,  we  must  remember  that  he  is  ex 
pressly  reported  to  have  written  his  work  with  the  intention  of  correcting 
the  erroneous  notions  about  Persia  prevalent  in  Greece ;  and  if  this  was 
the  case,  the  reader  must  naturally  be  prepared  to  find  the  accounts  of 
Ctesias  differing  from  those  of  others.  It  is,  moreover,  not  improbable  that 
the  Persian  Chronicles  were  as  partial  to  the  Persians,  if  not  more  so,  as 
the  accounts  written  by  Greeks  were  to  the  Greeks.  These  considera 
tions  may  fairly  account  for  the  differences  existing  between  the  state 
ments  of  Ctesias  and' the  other  writers  ;  and  there  would  seem  to  be  no 
good  reason  for  charging  him,  as  some  have  done,  with  wilfully  falsifying 
history.  It  is  at  least  certain  that  there  can  be  no  positive  evidence  for 
such  a  serious  charge.  The  court  chronicles  of  Persia  appear  to  have 
contained  chiefly  the  history  of  the  royal  family,  the  occurrences  at  the 
court  and  the  seraglio,  the  intrigues  of  the  women  and  eunuchs,  and  the 
insurrections  of  satraps  to  make  themselves  independent  of  the  great 
monarch.  Suidas  mentions  that  Pamphila  made  an  abridgment  of  the 
work  of  Ctesias,  probably  the  Persica,  in  three  books. 

!  Strab.,  I.  r.      2  Diod.  Sic.,  xiv..  46.      3  Dion.  Hal,  De  Comp.  Verb.,  10.      *  Cod.,  72. 


248 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


Another  work,  for  which  Ctesias  also  collected  his  materials  during  his 
stay  in  Persia,  was,  2.  A  treatise  on  India,  entitled  'Ii/5i/co,  in  one  book, 
of  which  we  likewise  possess  an  abridgment  in  Photius,  and  a  great  num 
ber  of  fragments  preserved  in  other  writers.  The  description  refers 
chiefly  to  the  northwestern  parts  of  India,  and  is  principally  confined  to 
a  description  of  the  natural  history,  the  produce  of  the  soil,  and  the  ani 
mals  and  men  of  India.  In  this  description,  truth  is  to  a  great  extent 
mixed  up  with  fables,  and  it  seems  to  be  mainly  owing  to  this  work  that 
Ctesias  was  looked  upon  in  later  times  as  an  author  who  deserved  no 
credit.  But  if  his  account  of  India  is  looked  upon  from  a  proper  point  of 
view,  it  does  not  in  any  way  deserve  to  be  treated  with  contempt.  Cte 
sias  himself  never  visited  India,  and  his  work  was  the  first  in  the  Greek 
language  that  was  written  upon  this  country ;  he  could  do  nothing  more 
than  lay  before  his  countrymen  that  which  was  known  or  believed  about 
India  among  the  Persians.  His  Indica  must,  therefore,  be  regarded  as  a 
picture  of  India,  such  as  it  was  conceived  by  the  Persians.  Many  things, 
moreover,  in  his  description,  which  were  formerly  looked  upon  as  fabu 
lous,  have  been  proved  by  the  more  recent  discoveries  in  India  to  be 
founded  on  facts. 

Ctesias  also  wrote  several  other  works,  of  which,  however,  we  know 
little  more  than  their  titles :  they  were,  3.  nepl  bpG>v,  which  consisted  of 
at  least  two  books.1  4.  Uep'nrXovs  'Atrias,2  which  is  perhaps  the  same  with 
the  Uepi-fj-yno-is,  of  which  Stephanus  Byzantinus3  quotes  the  third  book. 
5.  Uepl  TroTa/iwj/  ;*  and,  6.  Tltpl  TU>V  Kara  rr)i>  5A<n'aj/  $6p<av.  It  has  been  in 
ferred  from  a  passage  in  Galen5  that  Ctesias  also  wrote  on  medicine,  but 
no  account  of  his  medical  works  have  come  down  to  us.6 

The  abridgment  which  Photius  made  of  the  Persica  and  Indica  of  Cte 
sias  were  printed  separately  by  H.  Stephens,  Paris,  1557  and  1594,  8vo, 
and  were  also  added  to  his  edition  of  Herodotus.  After  his  time  it  be 
came  customary  to  print  the  remains  of  Ctesias  as  an  appendix  to  He 
rodotus.  The  first  separate  edition  of  those  abridgments,  together  with 
the  fragments  preserved  in  other  writers,  is  that  of  Lion,  Gottingen,  1823, 
8vo,  with  critical  notes  and  a  Latin  translation.  A  more  complete  edi 
tion,  with  an  introductory  essay  on  the  life  and  writings  of  Ctesias,  is 
that  of  Bahr,  Frankfort,  1824,  8vo.  An  edition  of  Photius,  with  a  revised 
text,  formed  on  a  collation  of  four  MSS.,  was  published  by  Bekker,  2  thin 
vols.  4to,  Berlin,  1824-5.  It  has,  however,  neither  version  nor  notes. 

IV.  PHILISTUS  (#I\J<TTOS),  a  Syracusan,  was  one  of  the  most  celebrated 
historians  of  antiquity,  though,  unfortunately,  only  a  few  fragments  of  his 
works  have  come  down  to  us.  He  was  born  probably  about  B.C.  435. 
Philistus  assisted  Dionysius  in  obtaining  the  supreme  power,  and  stood 
so  high  in  the  favor  of  the  tyrant  that  the  latter  intrusted  him  with  the 
charge  of  the  citadel  of  Syracuse.7  At  a  later  period,  however,  he  excit 
ed  the  jealousy  of  the  tyrant  by  marrying,  without  his  consent,  one  of  the 
daughters  of  his  brother  Leptines,  and  was  in  consequence  banished  from 

1  Pint.,  De  Fluv.,  21;  Stob.,  FloriL,  c.  18.  2  Steph.  Bijz.,  s.  v.  Styvfo?. 

3  s.  v.  Kocnmj.  4  Plut.,  De  Fluv.,  19.  5  v.,  p.  652,  cd.  Basle. 

6  Smith,  1.  c.  i  Biod.  Sic.,  xiv.,  8,  seqq. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  249 

Sicily.  He  at  first  retired  to  Thurii,  but  afterward  established  himself  at 
Adria,  where  he  composed  the  historical  work  which  has  given  celebrity 
to  his  name.1  But  he  always  bore  his  exile  with  impatience,  and  he  is 
accused  both  of  indulging  in  abject  lamentations  over  his  hard  fate  and 
fallen  fortunes,  and  of  base  and  unworthy  flattery  toward  Dionysius,  in 
hopes  of  conciliating  the  tyrant,  and  thus  obtaining  his  recall.2  These 
arts,  however,  failed  in  producing  any  effect  during  the  lifetime  of  the  elder 
Dionysius,  but  after  his  death  and  the  accession  of  his  son,  those  who 
were  opposed  to  the  influence  which  Dion  and  Plato  were  acquiring  over 
the  young  despot  persuaded  the  latter  to  recall  Philistus  from  banish 
ment,  in  hopes  that  from  his  age  and  experience,  as  well  as  his  military 
talents,  he  might  prove  a  counterpoise  to  the  increasing  influence  of  the 
two  philosophers.  The  plan  succeeded  ;  he  was  recalled  from  exile,  and 
quickly  gained  so  great  an  influence  over  the  mind  of  Dionysius  as  to 
alienate  him  from  his  former  friends,  and  eventually  cause  Plato  to  be 
sent  back  to  Athens,  and  Dion  to  be  banished.3  Philistus  was  absent 
from  Sicily  when  Dion  first  landed  in  the  island,  and  made  himself  mas 
ter  of  Syracuse,  B.C.  356.  Afterward,  however,  he  raised  a  powerful 
fleet,  with  which  he  gave  battle  to  the  Syracusans,  but  having  been  de 
feated,  and  finding  himself  cut  off  from  all  hopes  of  escape,  he  put  an 
end  to  his  own  life  to  avoid  falling  into  the  hands  of  his  enraged  coun 
trymen. 

Philistus  wrote  a  history  of  Sicily,  which  was  one  of  the  most  celebra 
ted  historical  works  of  antiquity,  though  unfortunately  only  a  fewT  frag 
ments  of  it  have  come  down  to  us.  It  consisted  of  two  portions,  which 
might  be  regarded  either  as  two  separate  wrorks,  or  as  parts  of  one  great 
whole,  a  circumstance  which  explains  the  discrepancies  in  the  statements 
of  the  number  of  books  of  which  it  was  composed.  The  first  seven  books 
comprised  the  general  history  of  Sicily,  commencing  from  the  earliest 
times,  and  ending  with  the  capture  of  Agrigentum  by  the  Carthaginians, 
B.C.  406.  Diodorus  tells  us  that  this  portion  included  a  period  of  800 
years  and  upward.  He  began  with  the  mythical  times,  and  the  alleged 
colonies  in  Sicily,  founded  by  Daedalus  and  others  before  the  Trojan  war. 
He  appears,  besides,  to  have  entered  at  some  length  into  the  origin  and 
migrations  of  the  original  inhabitants  of  the  island,  the  Sicani  and  Siculi.* 
The  second  part,  which  formed  a  regular  sequel  to  the  first,  contained  the 
history  of  the  elder  Dionysius  in  four  books,  and  that  of  the  younger  in 
two  :  the  latter  was  necessarily  imperfect,  a  circumstance  which  Dionys 
ius  of  Halicarnassus  absurdly  ascribes  to  his  desire  to  imitate  Thucyd- 
ides.  As  it  ended  only  five  years  after  the  accession  of  the  younger  ty 
rant,  it  is  probable  that  Philistus  had  not  found  time  to  continue  it  after 
his  own  return  from  exile.5 

Suidas  enumerates  several  other  historical  works  by  Philistus,  espe- 
cially  a  history  of  Egypt,  in  twelve  books,  one  of  Phoenicia,  and  another 

1  Diod.  Sic.,  xv.,  7  ;  Pint.,  Dion,  7.  2  Piut^  Timol.,  15  ;  Paws.,  i.,  13,  9. 

3  Pint.,  Dion,  11,  seqq.  ;  Pseud.  Plat.,  Ep.,  3,  p.  671. 

4  Dion.  Hal.,  Ant.  Rom.,  i.,  22 ;  Diod.  Sic.,  v.,  6. 

5  Diod.  Sic.,  xiii.,  103 ;  xv.,  69  ;  Suiit.,  s.  r 


250  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

of  Libya  and  Syria.  As  no  traces,  however,  of  any  of  these  works  are  to 
be  found  in  any  other  authority,  it  has  been  doubted  by  some  whether  the 
whole  statement  is  not  erroneous,1  while  others  suppose  that  these  writ 
ings  are  to  be  attributed  to  a  second  Philistus,  a  native  of  Naucratis,  in 
Egypt,  which  would  account  also  for  the  error  of  Suidas,  who  calls  our 
historian  Nau/fpariTTjs  r)  ~2,vpaKov<Tios.z 

In  point  of  style,  Philistus  is  represented  by  the  concurrent  testimony  of 
antiquity  as  imitating  and  even  closely  resembling  Thucydides,  though 
still  falling  far  short  of  his  great  model.  Cicero3  calls  him  "  capitalis,  cre- 
ber,  acutus,  brevis,  pane  pusillus  Thucydides;"  Quintilian4  also  terms  him 
"  imitator  Thucydidis,  et,  ut  multo  infirmior,  ita  aliquatcnus  lucidior ."  This 
qualified  praise  is  confirmed  by  the  more  elaborate  judgment  of  Dionys- 
ius  of  Halicarnassus,6  who  censures  Philistus  also  for  the  unskillful  ar 
rangement  of  his  subject,  and  the  monotony  and  want  of  art  displayed  in 
his  ordinary  narrative.  Longinus,6  who  cites  him  as  occasionally  rising 
to  sublimity,  intimates,  at  the  same  time,  that  this  was  far  from  being  the 
general  character  of  his  composition.  His  conciseness,  also,  led  him  not 
unfrequently  into  obscurity,  though  in  a  less  degree  than  Thucydides  ;  and 
this  defect  caused  many  persons  to  neglect  his  works  even  in  the  days  of 
Cicero.7  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus,  however,  associates  his  name  with 
those  of  Herodotus,  Thucydides,  Xenophon,  and  Theopompus,8  as  the  his 
torians  most  deserving  of  study  and  imitation  ;  but  his  writings  seem  to 
have  been  almost  wholly  neglected  by  the  rhetoricians  of  a  later  period ; 
and  Hermogenes9  passes  over  his  name,  in  common  with  those  of  Ephorus 
and  Theopompus,  as  wholly  unworthy  of  attention.  It  is  more  remark 
able  that  he  does  not  appear  to  have  been  included  by  the  Alexandrine 
critics  in  their  canon  of  historical  authors.10  But  the  reputation  that  he 
enjoyed  in  Greece  itself  shortly  before  that  period  is  attested  by  the  fact 
that  his  history  was  among  the  books  selected  by  Harpalus  to  send  to 
Alexander  in  Upper  Asia.11 

The  gravest  reproach  to  the  character  of  Philistus  as  an  historian  is  the 
charge  brought  against  him  by  many  writers  of  antiquity,  that  he  had 
sought  to  palliate  the  tyrannical  deeds  of  Dionysius,  and  give  a  specious 
color  to  his  conduct,  in  order  to  pave  the  way  for  his  own  return  from 
exile.  Plutarch  calls  him  a  man  eminently  skilled  in  inventing  specious 
pretences  and  fair  speeches  to  cloak  unjust  actions  and  evil  dispositions. 
He  was  severely  censured  on  the  same  account  by  Timscus.12 

The  fragments  of  Philistus  have  been  collected,  and  all  the  circum 
stances  transmitted  to  us  concerning  his  life  and  writings  fully  exam 
ined  and  discussed  by  Goller,  in  an  appendix  to  his  work  De  Situ  et  Ori- 
gine  Syracusarum  (Lips.,  8vo,  1816) ;  the  fragments  are  also  given  in  the 
Fragm.  Histor.  Grac.  of  C.  and  Th.  Miiller,  vol.  i.,  p.  185,  seqq.,  forming 
part  of  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  Paris,  1841. 

1  Wessding,  ad  Diod.  Sic.,  xiii..  p.  615 ;  Guller,  De  Orig.,  &c.,  Syrac.,  p.  106,  124. 

2  Bayle,  Diet.  Crit.,  s.  v.  Philist.,  not.  C.         3  Ad  Q.fr.,  ii.,  13.        *  Inst.  Or.,  x.,  1, 74. 
5  Ep.  ad  Pomp.,  5,  p.  779,  seqq.  6  De  Subl.,  40.  7  Cic.,  Brut.,  17. 

8  Ep.  ad  Pomp.,  p.  767.  9  De  Formis,  p.  396. 

10  Creuzer,  Hist.  Kunst  d.  Griechen,  p.  225.  ll  Plut.,  Alex.,  8. 

"  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  251 


V.  THEOPOMPUS  (Oediro^Tros)1  of  Chios,  a  celebrated  Greek  historian, 
was  born  about  B.C.  378.  He  accompanied  his  father  Damasistratus  into 
banishment,  when  the  latter  was  exiled  on  account  of  his  espousing  the 
interests  of  the  Lacedaemonians,  but  he  was  restored  to  his  native  coun 
try  in  the  forty-fifth  year  of  his  age  (B.C.  333),  in  consequence  of  the  let 
ters  of  Alexander  the  Great,  in  which  he  exhorted  the  Chians  to  recall 
their  exiles.2  In  what  year  Theopompus  quitted  Chios  with  his  father  is 
uncertain  ;  but  we  know  that,  before  he  left  his  native  country,  he  at 
tended  the  school  of  rhetoric  which  Isocrates  opened  at  Chios,  and  that 
he  profited  so  much  by  the  lessons  of  his  great  master  as  to  be  regarded 
by  the  ancients  as  the  most  distinguished  of  all  his  scholars.3  Ephorus 
the  historian  was  a  fellow-student  with  him,  but  was  of  a  very  different 
character  ;  and  Isocrates  used  to  say  of  them,  that  Theopompus  needed 
the  bit,  and  Ephorus  the  spur.4  In  consequence  of  the  advice  of  Isocra 
tes,  Theopompus  did  not  devote  his  oratorical  powers  to  the  pleading  of 
causes,  but  gave  his  chief  attention  to  the  study  and  composition  of  his 
tory.5  Like  his  master  Isocrates,  however,  he  composed  many  orations 
of  the  kind  called  Epideictic  by  the  Greeks,  that  is,  speeches  on  set  sub 
jects,  delivered  for  display,  such  as  eulogiums  on  states  and  individuals. 
Thus,  in  B.C.  352,  he  contended  at  Halicarnassus,  with  Naucrates  and 
his  master  Isocrates,  for  the  prize  of  oratory,  offered  by  Artemisia  in 
honor  of  her  husband's  memory,  and  gained  the  victory.6  On  his  return 
to  Chios  in  B.C.  333,  Theopompus,  who  was  a  man  of  great  wrealth  as 
well  as  learning,  naturally  took  an  important  position  in  the  state,  but  his 
vehement  temper  and  his  support  of  the  aristocratical  party  soon  raised 
against  him  a  host  of  enemies.  Of  these,  one  of  the  most  formidable  was 
the  sophist  Theocritus.  As  long,  however,  as  Alexander  lived,  his  ene 
mies  dared  not  take  any  open  proceedings  against  Theopompus  ;  and  even 
after  the  death  of  the  Macedonian  monarch  he  appears  to  have  enjoyed 
for  some  years  the  protection  of  the  royal  house.  But  when  he  lost  this 
support,  he  was  expelled  from  Chios  as  a  disturber  of  the  public  peace. 
He  fled  to  Egypt,  to  Ptolemy,7  about  B.C.  305,  being  at  the  time  about 
seventy-three  years  old.  Ptolemy,  however,  not  only  refused  to  receive 
Theopompus,  but  would  even  have  put  him  to  death  as  a  dangerous  busy 
body,  had  not  some  of  his  friends  interceded  for  his  life.  Of  his  farther 
fate  we  have  no  particulars,  but  he  probably  died  soon  afterward. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  works  of  Theopompus,  none  of  which 
have  come  down  to  us.  We  have  merely  some  fragments  remaining. 
1.  'ETTITO/J.-^  T&V  'HpoS6rov  itrropi&v.  "An  Epitome  of  the  History  of  Herod 
otus."  This  work  is  mentioned  by  Suidas,  and  in  a  few  passages  of  the 
grammarians,  but  it  has  been  questioned  by  Vossius  whether  it  was  real 
ly  drawn  up  by  Theopompus,  on  the  ground  that  it  is  improbable  that  a 
writer  of  his  attainments  and  skill  in  historical  composition  would  have 
engaged  in  such  a  task.  It  is,  however,  not  impossible  that  Theopompus 
may  have  made  the  Epitome  at  an  early  period  of  his  life  as  an  exercise 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  p^t.,  Cod.,  176,  p.  120,  B,  ed.  Bekker. 

3  Plut.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  837,  B.  *  Cic.,  Brut.,  56  ;  Ep.  ad  Att.,\.,  1,  12. 

5  Cic.,  De  Orat.,  ii.,  13,  22.  «  Aul  GelL,  \.,  1«,  1  Phot.,  Corf.,  176. 


252  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

in  composition.  2.  'EAArji/iKol  Icrroptcu,  or  2iWa|is  'EAMjj/t/cwj'.  "  A  His 
tory  of  Greece,"  in  twelve  books,  and  a  continuation  of  the  history  of  Thu- 
cydides.  It  commenced  B.C.  411,  at  the  point  where  the  history  of  Thu- 
cydides  breaks  off,  and  embraced  a  period  of  seventeen  years,  down  to 
the  battle  of  Cnidus,1  in  B.C.  394.  Only  a  few  fragments  of  this  work 
are  preserved.  3.  $i\nnriKci,  also  called  'Iffropiai  (/car*  Qoxw)-  "  The  His 
tory  of  Philip,"  father  of  Alexander  the  Great,  in  fifty-eight  books,  from 
the  commencement  of  his  reign  (B.C.  360)  to  his  death  (B.C.  336).  This 
work  contained  numerous  digressions,  which,  in  fact,  formed  the  greater 
part  of  the  whole  work,  so  that  Philip  V.,  king  of  Macedonia,  was  able,  by 
omitting  them,  and  retaining  only  what  belonged  to  the  proper  subject,  to 
reduce  the  work  from  fifty-eight  books  to  sixteen.  Fifty-three  of  the  fif 
ty-eight  books  of  the  original  were  extant  in  the  ninth  century  of  the 
Christian  era,  and  were  read  by  Photius,  who  has  preserved  an  abstract 
of  the  twelfth  book.  4.  Orations,  which  were  either  panegyrics,2  or  what 
the  Greeks  called  2u,u/3ouAetmKol  \6yoi.  Of  the  latter  kind,  one  of  the 
most  celebrated  was  addressed  to  Alexander  on  the  state  of  Chios.  5. 
Kara  UXaTwvos  diarpi^.  Perhaps  a  digression  in  his  Philippica.  6.  Uepl 
Evffefeias.  Another  digression,  probably,  in  the  same  work. 

Theopompus  is  praised  by  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus,  as  well  as  by 
other  ancient  writers,  for  his  diligence  and  accuracy ;  but  he  is,  at  the 
same  time,  blamed  by  most  writers  for  the  extravagance  of  his  praises 
and  censures.  He  is  said,  however,  to  have  taken  more  pleasure  in  blam 
ing  than  in  commending  ;  and  many  of  his  judgments  respecting  events 
and  characters  were  expressed  with  such  acrimony  and  severity,  that 
several  of  the  ancients  speak  of  his  malignity,  and  call  him  a  re  viler.3  It 
would  seem  that  the  vehemence  of  the  temper  of  Theopompus  frequently 
overcame  his  judgment,  and  prevented  him  from  expressing  himself  with 
the  calmness  and  impartiality  of  an  historian.  The  ancients  also  blame 
him  for  introducing  innumerable  fables  into  his  history.4  The  style  of 
Theopompus  was  formed  on  the  model  of  Isocrates,  and  possessed  the 
characteristic  merits  and  defects  of  his  master.  It  was  pure,  clear,  and 
elegant,  but  deficient  in  vigor,  loaded  with  ornament,  and,  in  general,  too 
artificial.  It  is  praised  in  high  terms  by  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus,  but 
it  is  spoken  of  in  very  different  language  by  other  critics.5 

The  fragments  of  Theopompus  have  been  published  by  Wichers,  "  Thco- 
pompi  Chii  Fragmenta,  collegit,  &c.,  R.  H.  Eyssonius  Wichers,  Lugd.  Bat., 
1829  ;  and  by  C.  and  Th.  Muller,  Fragm.  Histor.  Grac.,  vol.  i.,  p.  278,  seqq., 
in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Gr&ca,  Paris,  1841.  The  following  works  may  also 
be  consulted  respecting  him  :  Aschbach,  Dissert,  de  Theopomp.,  Francof, 
1823  ;  Pflugk,  De  Theopomp.  vita  et  scriptis,  Berol.,  1827. 

VI.  EPHORUS  (vE(j>opos)6  of  Cyme,  in  ^Eolis,  a  celebrated  Greek  histori 
an,  was  a  contemporary  of  Philip  and  Alexander,  and  flourished  about 
B.C.  340.  He  studied  rhetoric  under  Isocrates,  of  whose  pupils  he  and 

1  Diod.  Sic.,  xiii.,  42.  2  Theon,  Progymn.,  p.  19,  103  ;  Suid.,  s.  v. 

3  Corn.  Nep.,  Alcib.,  c.  11 ;  Clem.  Alex.,  i.,  p.  316. 

*  Cic.,  De  Leg.,  i.,  1 ;  JElian,  V.  H.,  iii.,  18. 

s  Lonffin.,  De  Subl,  43  ;  Dcrnctr.  Pfial.,  n-epl  ip/x.,  75.        6  Smith,  Diet.  Itiogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  253 

Theopompus  were  considered  the  most  distinguished.  From  Seneca1  it 
might  almost  appear  that  Ephorus  began  the  career  of  a  public  orator. 
Isocrates,  however,  dissuaded  him  from  that  course,  for  he  well  knew 
that  oratory  was  not  the  field  on  which  he  could  win  laurels,  and  he  ex 
horted  him  to  devote  himself  to  the  study  and  composition  of  history.  As 
Ephorus  was  of  a  more  quiet  and  contemplative  disposition  than  Theo 
pompus,  Isocrates  advised  the  former  to  write  the  early  history  of  Greece, 
and  Theopompus  to  take  up  the  later  and  more  turbulent  periods  of  his 
tory.2  Plutarch  relates3  that  Ephorus  was  among  those  who  were  ac 
cused  of  having  conspired  against  the  life  of  Alexander,  but  that  he  suc 
cessfully  refuted  the  charge  when  he  was  summoned  before  the  king. 
This  is  all  that  is  known  of  his  life. 

The  most  celebrated  of  all  the  works  of  Ephorus  was  a  History  ('laro- 
plai),  in  thirty  books,  which  began  with  the  return  of  the  Heraclidae,  and 
came  down  to  the  siege  of  Perinthus,  in  B.C.  341.  It  treated  of  the  his 
tory  of  the  barbarians  as  well  as  of  the  Greeks,  and  was  thus  the  first 
attempt  at  writing  a  universal  history  that  was  ever  made  in  Greece. 
It  embraced  a  period  of  750  years,  and  each  of  the  thirty  books  contained 
a  compact  portion  of  the  history,  which  formed  a  complete  whole  by  it 
self.  Each  also  contained  a  special  preface,  and  might  bear  a  separate 
title,  which  either  Ephorus  himself  or  some  later  grammarian  seems  act 
ually  to  have  given  to  each  book,  for  we  know  that  the  fourth  book  was 
called  Eup^TTTj.*  Ephorus  himself  did  not  live  to  complete  his  work,  and 
it  was  finished  by  his  son  Demophilus.  Diyllus  began  his  history  at  the 
point  at  which  the  history  of  Ephorus  left  off.  Ephorus  also  wrote  a  few 
other  works  of  less  importance,  of  which  the  titles  only  are  preserved  by 
the  grammarians.  We  possess  only  isolated  fragments  of  the  history. 
It  was  written,  as  might  be  expected  from  a  scholar  of  Isocrates,  in  a 
clear,  lucid,  and  elaborately-polished  style,  but  at  the  same  time  diffuse, 
and  deficient  in  power  and  energy,  so  that  Ephorus  is  by  no  means  equal 
to  his  master.  As  an  historian,  Ephorus  appears  to  have  been  faithful 
and  impartial  in  the  narration  of  events ;  but  he  did  not  always  follow 
the  best  authorities,  and  in  the  latter  part  of  his  work  he  frequently  dif 
fered  from  Herodotus,  Thucydides,  and  Xenophon,  on  points  on  which 
they  are  entitled  to  credit.  Diodorus  Siculus  made  great  use  of  his  work. 
Polybius5  praises  him  for  his  knowledge  of  maritime  warfare,  but  adds 
that  he  was  utterly  ignorant  of  the  mode  of  warfare  upon  land.  Strabo6 
acknowledges  his  merits  by  saying  that  he  separated  the  historical  from 
the  geographical  portions  of  his  work ;  and,  in  regard  to  the  latter,  he 
did  not  confine  himself  to  mere  lists  of  names,  but  he  introduced  investi 
gations  concerning  the  origin  of  nations,  their  constitution  and  manners, 
and  many  of  the  geographical  fragments  which  have  come  down  to  us 
contain  lively  and  beautiful  descriptions.7 

The  fragments  of  Ephorus  were  first  collected  by  Marx,  Carlsruhe, 
1815,  8vo,  who  afterward  published  some  additions  in  Friedemann  and 

1  De  Tranq.  An.,  6.  2  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Cic.,  De  Oral.,  iii.,  9  ;  Phot.,  Cod.,  176,  260. 

3  De  Stoic.  Repugn.,  10.        *  Diod.  Sic.,  iv.,  1 ;  v.,  1  ;  Polyb.,  v.,  33  ;  Strab.,  vii  ,  p  302 
5  xii"  25"  c  viii.,  p.  332.  v  8mith,  /.  Ci 


254  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Seebode's  Miscellan.  Crit.,  ii.,  4,  p.  764,  seqq.  They  are  also  contained 
in  C.  and  Th.  Muller's  Fragm.  Histor.  Grcec.,  vol.  i.,  p.  234,  seqq.,  forming 
part  of  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graca,  Paris,  1841. 

HISTORIANS     OF     ALEXANDER     THE     GREAT. 

I.  Several  works  existed  among  the  ancients  relative  to  the  expedi 
tions  of  Alexander  in  the  course  of  his  Eastern  conquests,  most  of  them 
composed  by  individuals  who  had  either  followed  in  his  train  or  had 
served  under  his  command.     We  must  guard,  however,  against  the  com 
mon  error  of  making  the  number  of  these  writers  a  large  one,  an  error 
not  confined  merely  to  modern  times,  but  into  which  even  Cicero  him 
self1  has  fallen,  when  he  says,  with  far  more  of  oratorical  embellishment 
than  of  historical  truth,  "  quam  multos  scriptores  rerum  suarum  magnus  ille 
Alexander  secuin  habuisse  traditur  .'"2 

II.  A  careful  examination  of  the  whole  subject  will  limit  the  list  of  the 
writers  in  question  to  the  following  individuals  ;  namely,  of  those  who 
followed  in  the  train  of  Alexander,  Anaximenes,  Callisthenes,  and  perhaps 
Clitarchus,  and  of  the  monarch's  companions  in  arms,  Ptolemaus,  Aristo- 
bulus,  Onesicritus,  Ncarchus,  Chares,  Ephippus,  Marsyas,  Androsthenes,  and 
Medius.     To  these  we  may  add,  though  not  strictly  falling  under  the  de 
nomination  of  historians  of  Alexander,  Eumenes  and  Diodotus,  authors  of 
'E^rjjue/n'Ses  'AA.e£ap8pov,  and  Baton  and  Diognetus,  who  measured  distan 
ces  in  the  marches  of  Alexander,  and  wrote  each  a  work  on  the  subject, 
the  title  of  Baton's  book  having  been  2raQ/j.ol  rrjs  'A\e£dv8pov  Tro/jefas.3 

III.  As  the  works  of  all  these  writers  are  lost,  and  some  scattered 
fragments  alone  remain,  our  account  of  them  will  be  necessarily  brief. 

1.  ANAXIMENES*  ('Ava^ifjLfvrjs)  was  a  native  of  Lampsacus,  and  pupil  of 
Zoilus  and  Diogenes  the  Cynic.  He  was  a  contemporary  of  Alexander, 
whom  he  is  said  to  have  instructed,  and  whom  he  accompanied  on  his 
Asiatic  expedition.5  He  wrote  three  historical  works:  1.  A  history  of 
Philip  of  Macedonia,  consisting  of  at  least  eight  books.6  2.  A  history  of 
Alexander  the  Great?  the  second  book  of  which  is  quoted  by  Harpocration. 
3.  A  history  of  Greece,  in  twelve  books,  from  the  earliest  mythical  ages 
down  to  the  battle  of  Mantinea  and  the  death  of  Epaminondas.  The  his 
tories  of  Anaximenes,  of  which  only  a  very  few  fragments  are  now  ex 
tant,  are  censured  by  Plutarch  for  the  numerous  prolix  and  rhetorical 
speeches  which  he  introduced  into  them.  The  fact  that  we  possess  so 
little  of  his  histories  shows  that  the  ancients  did  not  think  highly  of  them, 
and  that  they  were  more  of  a  rhetorical  than  an  historical  character.  He 
enjoyed  some  reputation  as  a  teacher  of  rhetoric  and  as  an  orator,  and 
what  renders  him  a  person  of  the  highest  importance  in  the  history 
of  Greek  literature  is  the  fact  that  he  is  the  only  rhetorician  whose 
scientific  treatise  on  rhetoric,  prior  to  that  of  Aristotle,  is  now  extant. 
This  is  the  so-called  'PrjropiK^  irpbs  'A.\<s£av$pov,  which  is  usually  printed 


1  Or.  pro  Arch.,  c.  10.     Compare  Sainte-Croix,  Ex.  Crit.,  &c.,  p.  33. 

2  Geier,  Hist.  Scrip.  Alex.  M.,  Prolegom.,  c.  2,  p.  xvii.    Geier's  work  is  far  more  wor- 
fhy  of  reliance  than  Sainte-Croix's.  3  Geier,  1.  c.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

5  Suid.,  s.  v.  ;  Eudoc.,  p.  51.        6  Harpocrat.,  s.  v.  Ka/SuXr/.        7  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  3. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  255 

among  the  works  of  Aristotle,  to  whom,  however,  it  can  not  belong,  as 
all  critics  agree.  The  treatise  on  rhetoric  was  edited  separately  by  Spen- 
gel,  Turici,  1844.  The  fragments  of  the  history  of  Alexander  are  given 
by  Geier,  in  his  "  Scriptores  Historiarum  Alexandri  M.  <ztate  suppares," 
Lips.,  1844,  p.  285,  seqq.,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  in  the  appendix  to  Diibner's 
Arrian,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Gr&ca,  p.  35,  seqq. 

2.  CALLISTHENES1  (Ka.\\iffQevr\s)  of  Olynthus,  a  relation  and  pupil  of 
Aristotle,  accompanied  Alexander  the  Great  to  Asia.     In  his  intercourse 
with  the  monarch  he  was  arrogant  and  bold,  and  took  every  opportunity 
of  showing  his  independence.     He  expressed  his  indignation  at  Alexan 
der's  adoption  of  Oriental  customs,  and  especially  at  the  requirement  of 
the  ceremony  of  adoration.     He  thus  rendered  himself  so  obnoxious  to 
the  king  that  he  was  accused  of  being  privy  to  the  plot  of  Hermolaus  to 
assassinate  Alexander,  and,  after  being  kept  in  chains  for  seven  months, 
was  either  put  to  death  or  died  of  disease.     Callisthenes  wrote  an  ac 
count  of  Alexander's  expedition  ;  a  history  of  Greece,  in  ten  books,  from 
the  peace  of  Antalcidas  to  the  seizure  of  the  Delphic  temple  by  Philome- 
lus  (B.C.  387-357),  and  other  works,  all  of  which,  except  a  few  fragments, 
have  perished.     The  fragments  of  the  history  of  Alexander  are  given  by 
Geier,  Script.  Hist.  Alex.  M.,  &c.,  Lips.,  1844,  p.  232,  seqq.,  and  by  C. 
Miiller,  in  the  appendix  to  Diibner's  Arrian,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca, 
p.  1,  seqq.     Some  MSS.  are  still  extant,  professing  to  contain  writings  of 
Callisthenes,  but  they  are  spurious.3 

3.  CLiTARCHus3  ( K\€Lrapxos ),  son  of  the  historian  Dinon,4  accompa 
nied  Alexander  in  his  Asiatic  expedition,  and  wrote  a  history  of  it.    Such, 
at  least,  is  the  commonly  received  account,  although  considerable  doubt 
has  recently  been  thrown  upon  the  assumed  fact  of  his  having  accompa 
nied  the  monarch.     The  work  of  Clitarchus  has  been  erroneously  sup 
posed  by  some  to  have  formed  the  basis  of  that  of  Quintus  Curtius,  who 
is  thought  to  have  closely  followed,  even  if  he  did  not  translate  it.     We 
find  Curtius,  however,  in  one  passage,  differing  from  Clitarchus,  and  even 
censuring  him  for  his  inaccuracy.     Cicero  also  speaks  very  slightingly  of 
the  production  in  question.     Quintilian  says  that  his  ability  was  greater 
than  his  veracity ;  and  Longinus  condemns  his  style  as  frivolous  and  in 
flated.     The  fragments  of  Clitarchus  are  given  by  Geier,  Script.  Hist. 
Alex.  M.,  p.  160,  seqq.,  Lips.,  1844,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  in  the  appendix  to 
Diibner's  Arrian,  p.  77,  seqq. 

4.  PTOLEM^EUS  (nToAe^aTos),  son  of  Lagus,  first  Greek  king  of  Egypt, 
not  content  with  the  praise  of  an  enlightened  patron  and  friend  of  litera 
ture,  sought  for  himself  also  the  fame  of  an  author,  and  composed  an 
historical  narrative  of  the  wars  of  Alexander,  in  which  he  had  borne  part. 
His  work  is  frequently  cited  by  later  writers,  and  is  one  of  the  chief  au 
thorities  which  Arrian  made  the  ground-work  of  his  history.    That  author 
repeatedly  praises  Ptolemy  for  the  fidelity  of  his  narrative,  and  the  ab 
sence  of  all  fables  and  exaggerations,  and  justly  pays  the  greatest  defer- 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

2  MUller  has  given  the  Pseudo-Callisthenes  in  his  appendix  to  Diibner's  Arrian,  p.  1-152. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biog.,  s.  v.  *  Plin.,  H.  N.,  x.,49. 


256  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ence  to  his  authority,  on  account  of  his  personal  acquaintance  with  the 
events  which  he  relates.  No  notice  of  his  style  has  been  preserved  to 
us,  from  which  we  may  probably  infer  that  his  work  was  not  so  much 
distinguished  in  this-  respect  as  for  its  historical  value.  Arrian  expressly 
tells  us  that  it  was  composed  by  Ptolemy  after  he  was  established  on  the 
throne  of  Egypt,  and  probably  during  the  latter  years  of  his  life.1  The 
fragments  of  this  work  are  given  by  Geier,  Script.  Hist.  Alex.  M.,  p.  5, 
seqq.,  Lips.,  1844,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  as  above,  p.  87,  seqq. 

5.  ARISTOBULUS  ( 'Apurr 6fiov\os )  of  Cassandrea  (of  which,  however, 
consistently  with  chronology,  he  could  not  have  been  a  native)  was  one 
of  the  companions  of  Alexander  the  Great  in  his  Asiatic  conquests,  though 
not  named  among  his  generals.     He  wrote  a  history  of  Alexander,  which 
was  one  of  the  chief  sources  used  by  Arrian  in  the  composition  of  his 
work.     Aristobulus  lived  to  the  age  of  ninety,  and  did  not  begin  to  write 
his  history  until  he  was  eighty- four.2     His  work  is  frequently  referred 
to  by  Athenaeus.3     Lucian*  relates  an  anecdote  relative  to  Alexander 
and  Aristobulus,  tending  to  prove  that  the  latter  had  written  his  work  in 
a  spirit  of  gross  adulation  toward  the  monarch,  but  many  modern  schol 
ars  think  that  the  story  ought  to  be  referred  to  Onesicritus,  and  that  the 
error  arose  from  the  copyists.     Schneider  and  Geier,  however,  dissent 
from  this  opinion.     The  fragments  of  Aristobulus  are  given  by  Geier, 
Script.  Hist.  Alex.  M.,  p.  31,  seqq.,  Lips.,  1844,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  as  above, 
p.  94,  seqq. 

6.  ONEsicRiTus5  ('Ovrio-LKpiTos)  was,  according  to  some  writers,  a  na 
tive  of  Astypalea,  one  of  the  Sporades  ;  according  to  others,  of  JEgina  ;6 
and  it  was  probably  to  this  island-origin  that  he  was  indebted  for  the  skill 
in  nautical  matters  which  afterward  proved  so  advantageous  to  him. 
Onesicritus  accompanied  Alexander  on  his  campaigns  in  Asia,  and  wrote 
a  history  of  them,  which  is  frequently  cited  by  ancient  authors.     We 
have  no  account  of  the  circumstances  which  led  him  to  accompany  Al 
exander  into  Asia,  nor  does  it  appear  in  what  capacity  he  attended  on 
the  conqueror ;  but  during  the  expedition  into  India  he  was  sent  by  the 
king  to  hold  a  conference  with  the  Indian  philosophers  or  Gymnosophists, 
the  details  of  which  have  been  transmitted  to  us  from  his  own  account 
of  the  interview.7    When  Alexander  constructed  his  fleet  on  the  Hydas- 
pes,  he  appointed  Onesicritus  to  the  important  station  of  pilot  of  the 
king's  ship,  or  chief  pilot  to  the  fleet  (apxiKv^ep^r-ns),  a  post  which  he 
held  not  only  during  the  descent  of  the  Indus,  but  throughout  the  long 
and  perilous  voyage  from  the  mouth  of  that  river  to  the  Persian  Gulf. 
In  this  capacity,  he  discharged  his  duties  so  much  to  the  satisfaction  of 
Alexander,  that,  on  his  arrival  at  Susa,  he  was  rewarded  by  that  monarch 
with  a  crown  of  gold,  at  the  same  time  as  Nearchus.     Yet  Arrian  blames 
him  for  want  of  judgment,  and  on  one  occasion  expressly  ascribes  the 
safety  of  the  fleet  to  the  firmness  of  Nearchus  in  overruling  his  advice.8 

1  Arrian,  Anab.,  i.,  procem.  2  Lucian,  Macrob.,  22. 

3  ii.,  p.  43,  D  ;  vi.,  p.  251,  A ;  x.,  p.  434,  D,  &c.       4  Quomodo  Hist,  conscrib.,  c.  12. 
5  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v  6  Diog.  Laert.,  vi.,  75  ;  Arrian,  Ind.,  18. 

'  Strab.,  xv.,  p.  715  ;  Pint.,  Alex.,  65.  8  Arrian,  vii.,  20  ;  Ind.,  32. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  257 

We  know  nothing  of  his  subsequent  fortunes  ;  but,  from  an  anecdote  re 
lated  by  Plutarch,  it  seems  probable  that  he  attached  himself  to  Lysima- 
chus,  and  it  was  perhaps  at  the  court  of  that  monarch  that  he  composed 
his  historical  work,1  though,  on  the  other  hand,  a  passage  of  Lucian3 
might  lead  us  to  infer  that  this  was  at  least  commenced  during  the  life 
time  of  Alexander  himself.  Such  is  the  opinion  of  Geier,  among  others. 
We  learn  from  Diogenes  Laertius3  that  the  history  of  Onesicritus  com 
prised  the  whole  life  of  Alexander,  including  his  youth  and  education ; 
but  it  is  most  frequently  cited  in  relation  to  the  campaigns  of  that  prince 
in  Asia,  or  to  the  geographical  description  of  the  countries  that  he  visited. 
Though  an  eye-witness  of  much  that  he  described,  it  appears  that  he  in 
termixed  many  fables  and  falsehoods  with  his  narrative,  so  that  he  early 
fell  into  discredit  as  an  authority.  Still,  his  work  appears  to  have  con 
tained  much  valuable  information  concerning  the  remote  countries  for 
the  first  time  laid  open  by  the  expedition  of  Alexander.  In  particular, 
he  was  the  first  author  that  mentioned  the  island  of  Taprobane.4  He  is 
said  to  have  imitated  Xenophon  in  his  style,  though  he  fell  short  of  him, 
as  a  copy  does  of  the  original.5  Onesicritus,  when  advanced  in  years, 
turned  his  attention  to  the  Cynic  philosophy,  of  which  he  became  an  ar 
dent  votary.  The  fragments  of  Onesicritus  are  given  by  Geier,  Script. 
Hist.  Alex.  M.j  p.  83,  seqq.,  Lips.,  1844,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  in  Didot's  Billi- 
otheca  Graca,  p.  47,  seqq.,  Paris,  1846. 

7.  NEARCHUS  (Ne'apx0*)  was  a  native  of  Crete,  but  settled  at  Amphipo- 
lis,6  and  one  of  the  most  distinguished  of  the  officers  arid  friends  of  Al 
exander.     He  accompanied  the  king  to  Asia,  and  in  B.C.  325  was  intrust 
ed  by  Alexander  with  the  command  of  the  fleet  which  he  had  caused  to 
be  constructed  on  the  Hydaspes.7    Upon  reaching  the  mouth  of  the  Indus, 
Alexander  resolved  to  send  round  his  ships  by  sea  from  thence  to  the 
Persian  Gulf,  and  he  gladly  accepted  the  offer  of  Nearchus  to  undertake 
the  command  of  the  fleet  during  this  long  and  perilous  navigation.     Ne 
archus  set  out  on  the  21st  of  September,  B.C.  326,  and  arrived  at  Susa 
in  safety  in  February,  B.C.  325.     He  was  rewarded  with  a  crown  of  gold 
for  his  distinguished  services.     Nearchus  left  a  history  of  the  voyage,  the 
substance  of  which  has  been  preserved  to  us  by  Arrian,  who  has  derived 
from  it  the  whole  of  the  latter  part  of  the  "  Indica."     The  fragments  of 
the  work  of  Nearchus  are  given  by  Geier,  Script.  Hist.  Alex.  M.,  p.  117, 
seqq.,  Lips.,  1844,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  at  the  end  of  Diibner's  Arrian,  Paris, 
1846,  p.  60,  seqq.     There  is  also  a  valuable  translation  of  the  voyage  of 
Nearchus  (from  Arrian)  by  Vincent,  Oxford,  1809,  4to. 

8.  CHARES  (Xaprjs)  was  a  native  of  Mytilene,  and  an  officer  at  the 
court  of  Alexander,  whose  duty  it  was  to  introduce  strangers  to  the  king 
(eiso77€\eus).     He  wrote  a  history,  or,  rather,  a  collection  of  anecdotes 
concerning  the  campaigns  and  the  private  life  of  Alexander,  in  ten  books, 
fragments  of  which  are  preserved  by  Athenaeus  and  Plutarch.     Pliny  ap 
pears  to  have  drawn  largely  from  him.     Chares  was  regarded  as  a  writer 

1  Pint.,  Alex.,  46.  2  Quomodo  Hist,  cmscr.,  c.  40.  3  vi.,  84. 

*  Strab.,  xv.,  p.  691  ;  Plin.,  H.  N.,  vi.,  24.  *  IHog.  Laert.,  vi.,  84. 

6  Arrian,  Ind.,  18  ;  Diod.  Sic.,  xix.,  19.  *  Arrian,  Anal.,  iv.,  7,  4,  &e. 

K 


258  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

of  high  authority,  and  pleasing  in  style.  The  fragments  are  given  by 
Geier,  Script.  Hist.  Alex.  M.,  p.  293,  seqq.,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  as  above,  p. 
114,  seqq. 

9.  EPHIPPUS  (*E(f>Linros),  of  Olynthus,  was  also  an  historian  of  Alexan 
der.     Mention  is  made  in  a  passage  of  Arrian  of  an  Ephippus  who  was 
appointed,  along  with  JSschylus  the  Rhodian,  superintendent  (e7nV/<o7ros) 
of  Egypt.     It  has  been  supposed  that  this  Ephippus  is  the  same  with  the 
historian.     From  the  few  fragments  still  extant,  it  would  appear  that 
Ephippus  described  more  the  private  and  personal  character  of  his  heroes 
than  their  public  careers.     The  fragments  are  given  by  Geier,  p.  312, 
seqq.,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  p.  125,  seqq. 

10.  MxRSYAs1  (Maptruas)  was  a  native  of  Pella,  in  Macedonia,  and,  ac 
cording  to  Suidas,  was  educated  along  with  Alexander,  whom  he  after 
ward  accompanied  into  Asia.     We  find  him,  after  the  death  of  that  mon 
arch,  appointed  by  Demetrius  to  command  one  division  of  his  fleet  in  the 
great  sea-fight  off  Salamis,  in  the  island  of  Cyprus,2  B.C.  306.     His  princi 
pal  literary  work  was  a  history  of  Macedonia,  in  ten  books,  commencing 
from  the  earliest  times,  and  coming  down  to  the  wars  of  Alexander  in 
Asia,  when  it  terminated  abruptly  with  the  return  of  that  monarch  into 
Syria,  after  the  conquest  of  Egypt  and  the  foundation  of  Alexandrea.     It 
is  repeatedly  cited  by  Athenaeus,  Plutarch,  Harpocration,  and  other  writ 
ers.    Suidas  also  speaks  of  a  history  of  the  education  of  Alexander  (avrov 
rot)  'A\€£dvSpov  aywyfiv)  as  a  separate  work  by  Marsyas.     He  is  often 
confounded  with  another  and  younger  Marsyas,  a  native  of  Philippi.    The 
fragments  of  Marsyas  are  given  by  Geier,  p.  325,  seqq.,  and  by  C.  Miiller, 
p.  42,  seqq. 

11.  ANDROSTHENES  ('Av^poffOfvrjs),  of  Thasus,  was  one  of  Alexander's 
admirals,  and  sailed  with  Nearchus.     He  wTas  also  sent  by  Alexander  to 
explore  the  coast  of  the  Persian  Gulf.     He  wrote  an  account  of  this  voy 
age,  and  also  a  Trjs  'IvSi/cf??  irapaTrXovs.     The  fragments  of  Androsthenes 
are  given  by  Geier,  p.  345,  seqq.,  and  by  C.  Miiller,  p.  72,  seqq. 

12.  MEDIUS  (M^jSios)3  was  a  native  of  Larissa,  in  Thessaly,  and  a  friend 
of  Alexander's.     He  is  mentioned  as  commanding  a  trireme  during  the 
descent  of  the  Indus,*  but,  with  this  exception,  his  name  does  not  appear 
in  the  military  operations  of  the  king.     He  appears,  however,  to  have  en 
joyed  a  high  place  in  the  personal  favor  of  the  monarch,  and  it  was  at 
his  house  that  Alexander  supped  just  before  his  last  illness.     Hence,  ac 
cording  to  those  writers  who  represented  the  king  to  have  been  poisoned, 
it  wTas  at  this  banquet  that  the  fatal  draught  was  administered,  and  not 
without  the  cognizance,  as  it  was  said,  of  Medius  himself.    Plutarch  speaks 
in  very  unfavorable  terms  of  Medius,  whom  he  represents  as  one  of  the 
flatterers  to  whose  evil  counsels  the  most  reprehensible  of  the  actions  of 
Alexander  were  to  be  ascribed.5    But  no  trace  of  this  is  to  be  found  in 
the  better  authorities. 

After  the  death  of  Alexander,  Medius  followed  the  fortunes  of  Antigo- 
nus,  whose  fleet  we  find  him  commanding  in  B.C.  314.     The  following 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Diod.  Sic.,  xx.,  50.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

*  Arri«.n,  Ind.,  18.  s  P'uL,  De  AduL  ct  Amir.,  24. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  259 

year  he  took  Miletus.  In  B.C.  312  he  was  dispatched  by  Antigonus,  with 
a  fleet  of  150  ships,  to  make  a  descent  on  Greece,  and  landed  a  large  army 
in  Boeotia.  At  a  subsequent  period,  he  accompanied  Antigonus  on  his 
unsuccessful  expedition  against  Egypt,  but  after  this  we  hear  no  more  of 
him.  He  wrote  an  historical  work,  as  plainly  appears  from  Strabo,  but 
whether  it  related  to  the  campaigns  of  Alexander  or  of  his  successors,  is 
uncertain.  The  fragments  are  given  by  Geier,  p.  351,  and  by  C.  Muller, 
p.  128. 

13.  The  fragments  of  the  'Ec^epi'Ses  of  Eumenes  and  Diodotus  are 
given  by  Geier,  p.  360,  seqq.,  and  by  C.  Muller,  p.  121,  seqq. ;  and  those 
of  the  2ra0/iot  rr\s  'AAe|aj/5pov  iropeias  of  Bceton  and  Diognetus,  by  Geier, 
p.  367,  seqq.,  and  C.  Muller,  p.  134,  seg. 


CHAPTER  XXXIII. 
FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD— continued. 

GEOGRAPHICAL     WRITERS. 

I.  IN  connection  with  the  writers  composing  the  school  of  history,  we 
propose  to  consider  briefly  the  geographical  authors  of  this  same  period, 
as  far  as  their  date  can  be  correctly  ascertained  through  the  investigations 
of  modern  scholars.     Geography  and  history  are  so  naturally  connected, 
that  a  separation  of  them  wrould  only  tend  to  produce  confusion  and  con 
sequent  obscurity. 

II.  The  geographical  writers,  however,  that  will  here  require  our  atten 
tion  are  very  few  in  number,  namely,  Scylax  of  Caryanda,  and  Pytheas  of 
Massilia,  as  a  fit  introduction  to  whose  labors  we  will  first  give  a  sketch 
of  the  discoveries  of  the  Carthaginian  navigator  Hanno,  the  more  espe 
cially  as  they  are  known  to  us  through  the  medium  of  the  Greek  transla 
tion  of  the  Punic  work  in  which  the  account  was  originally  written. 

III.  HANNO  ("Away)1  was  a  Carthaginian  navigator,  as  already  stated, 
under  whose  name  we  possess  a  nepforAous,  or  a  short  account  of  a  voy 
age  round  a  part  of  Africa.     This  work  was  originally  written  in  the  Punic 
language,  and  what  has  come  down  to  us  is  a  Greek  translation  of  the 
original.     The  work  is  often  referred  to  by  the  ancients,  but  we  have  no 
statement  containing  any  direct  information,  by  means  of  which  we  might 
identify  its  author,  Hanno,  with  any  of  the  many  other  Carthaginians  of 
that  name,  or  fix  the  time  at  which  he  lived.     Pliny2  states  that  Hanno 
undertook  the  voyage  when  Carthage  was  in  a  most  flourishing  condition. 
Some  call  him  king,  and  others  dux  or  imperator  of  the  Carthaginians,  from 
.which  we  may  infer  that  he  was  invested  with  the  office  of  Su/ete.3     In 
,the  Periplus  itself  Hanno  says  that  he  was  sent  out  by  his  countrymen 
to  undertake  a  voyage  beyond  the  Pillars  of  Hercules,  and  to  found  Liby- 
phcenician  towns,  and  that  he  sailed  accordingly  with  sixty  penteconteres, 
and  a  body  of  men  and  women,  to  the  number  of  30,000,  and  provisions 
and  other  necessaries.     On  his  return  from  his  voyage,  he  dedicated  an 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  u.  N.,  ii.,  67  ;  v.,  1,  36. 

3  .So&n,,  56;  Hanno,  Peripl.,  Introd. 


260  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

account  of  it,  inscribed  on  a  tablet,  in  the  temple  of  Saturn,  or,  as  Pliny 
says,  in  that  of  Juno.1  It  is  therefore  presumed  that  the  Periplus  which 
has  come  down  to  us  is  a  Greek  version  of  the  contents  of  that  Punic 
tablet. 

These  vague  accounts,  leaving  open  the  widest  field  for  conjecture 
and  speculation,  have  led  some  critics  to  place  the  expedition  as  early  as 
the  Trojan  war,  or  the  time  of  Hesiod,  while  others  bring  it  down  to  the 
reign  of  Agathocles.  Others,  again,  as  Falconer,  Bougainville,  and  Gail, 
with  somewhat  more  probability,  place  Hanno  about  B.C.  570.  But  it 
seems  preferable  to  identify  him  with  Hanno,  the  father  or  son  of  Hamil- 
car,  who  was  killed  at  Himera  B.C.  480.  The  fact  of  such  an  expedition 
at  that  time  has  nothing  at  all  improbable,  for  in  the  reign  of  the  Egyp 
tian  king  Necho,  a  similar  voyage  had  been  undertaken  by  the  Phoeni 
cians,  and  an  accurate  knowledge  of  the  western  coast  of  Africa  was  a 
matter  of  the  highest  importance  to  the  Carthaginians.  The  number  of 
colonists,  30,000,  is  undoubtedly  an  error  either  of  the  translator  or  of 
later  transcribers.  This  circumstance,  as  well  as  many  fabulous  accounts 
contained  in  the  Periplus,  and  the  difficulties  connected  with  the  identifi 
cation  of  the  places  visited  by  Hanno,  and  with  the  fixing  of  the  south 
ernmost  point  to  which  he  penetrated,  are  not  sufficient  reasons  for  de 
nying  the  genuineness  of  the  Periplus,  or  for  regarding  it  as  the  product 
of  a  much  later  age,  as  Dodwell  did.  The  best  opinion  appears  to  be  that 
Hanno  passed  considerably  south  of  the  Senegal  River,  but  hardly  farther 
than  the  coast  of  Sierra  Leone. 

The  first  edition  of  Hanno's  Periplus  appeared  at  Basle,  1534,  4to,  as  an  appendix  to 
Arrian,  by  Gelenius.  This  was  followed  by  the  editions  of  Boeder  and  Miiller,  Stras- 
burg,  1661,  4to  ;  Berkel,  Leyden,  1674,  12mo  ;  and  Falconer,  London,  1797,  with  an  En 
glish  translation,  two  dissertations,  and  maps.  It  is  also  printed  in  Hudson's  Geographi 
GroBci  Minores,  Oxford,  1698rl712,  4  vols.  8vo,  with  Dodwell's  dissertation  "  De  vero 
Peripli,  qui  Hannonis  nomine  circumfertur,  tempore,"  in  which  he  attacks  the  genuineness 
of  the  work ;  but  his  arguments  are  satisfactorily  refuted  by  Bougainville  (Mem.  dePAcad. 
dcs  Inscript.,  xxvi.,  p.  10,  seqq. ;  xxviii.,  p.  260,  seqq.),  and  by  Falconer  in  his  second  dis 
sertation.  The  Periplus  is  also  given  in  Gail's  Geographi  Graeci  Minores,  Paris,  1826- 
1831,  3  vols.  8vo,  and  separately  by  Kluge,  Lips.,  1829,  8vo. 

IV.  SCYLAX  (2/cuAa!)  of  Caryanda,  in  Caria,  was  sent,  according  to  He 
rodotus,  by  Darius  Hystaspis,  on  a  voyage  of  discovery  down  the  Indus. 
Setting  out  from  the  city  of  Caspatyrus  and  the  Pactyican  district,  Scy- 
lax  and  his  companions  sailed  down  the  river  to  the  east  and  the  rising 
of  the  sun,  till  they  reached  the  sea ;  whence  they  sailed  westward 
through  the  Indian  Ocean  to  the  Red  Sea,  performing  the  whole  voyage 
in  thirty  months.  Thus  far  Herodotus.2  We  have  still  extant  a  brief  de 
scription  of  certain  countries  in  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa,  which  bears  the 
name  of  Scylax  of  Caryanda,  and  is  entitled  UfptirXovs  T^S  &a\do-o-ns  oltcov- 
p.fvr)s  Evpcairns  Kal  'Aortas  Kal  Aifivrjs.  This  little  work  was  supposed  by 
Holstenius,  Fabricius,  Sainte-Croix,  and  others,  to  have  been  written  by 
the  Scylax  mentioned  by  Herodotus  ;  other  writers,  on  the  contrary,  such 
as  G.  Vossius,  J.  Vossius,  and  Dodwell,  regarded  the  author  as  the  con 
temporary  of  Panaetius  and  Polybius ;  but  most  modern  scholars  arc  dis- 

1  Compare  Pomp.  Mela,  iii.,  9  ;  Athen.,  Hi.,  83.  2  Herod.,  iv.,  44. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  261 

posed  to  follow  the  opinion  of  Niebuhr,  who  supposes  the  writer  to  have 
lived  in  the  first  half  of  the  reign  of  Philip  of  Macedon,  the  father  of  Alex 
ander  the  Great  (Philip  began  to  reign  B.C.  360).  Niebuhr  shows  from 
internal  evidence  that  the  Periplus  must  have  been  composed  long  after 
the  time  of  Herodotus ;  while,  from  its  omitting  to  mention  any  of  the 
cities  founded  by  Alexander,  such  as  Alexandrea  in  Egypt,  as  well  as 
from  other  circumstances,  we  may  conclude  that  it  was  drawn  up  before 
the  reign  of  Alexander.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  the  author,  who 
ever  he  was,  may  not  have  borne  the  name  of  Scylax  himself,  but  pre 
fixed  to  his  work  that  of  Scylax  of  Caryanda,  on  account  of  the  celebrity 
of  the  navigator  in  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis.  Aristotle  is  the  first 
writer  who  refers  to  Scylax  ;l  but  it  is  evident  from  his  reference,  as  well 
as  from  the  quotations  from  Scylax  in  other  ancient  writers,2  which  re 
fer  to  matters  not  contained  in  the  Periplus  that  has  come  down  to  us, 
that  we  possess  only  an  abridgment  of  the  original  work.3 

The  Periplus  of  Scylax  was  first  published  by  Hoeschel,  with  other 
minor  Greek  geographers,  Augsburg,  1600,  8vo  ;  next  by  Is.  Vossius,  Am» 
sterdam,  1639,  4to  ;  subsequently  by  Hudson,  in  his  Geographi  Graci  Mi- 
nores,  Oxford,  1698-1712,  4  vols.  8vo ;  by  Gail,  in  his  Geogr.  Gr&c.  Min., 
Paris,  1826-1831,  3  vols.  8vo  ;  and  separately  by  Klausen,  attached  to  his 
edition  of  the  fragments  of  Hecataeus,  Berlin,  1831,  8vo.  The  following 
works  may  be  consulted  with  profit  in  relation  to  the  work  under  consid 
eration  :  Niebuhr,  Ueber  das  Alter  des  Kustenbeschreibers  Skylax  von  Kary- 
anda,  in  his  Kleine  Schriften,  vol.  i.,  p.  105,  seqq.,  translated  in  the  Philo^ 
logical  Museum,  vol.  i.,  p.  245,  seqq.,  and  Ukert,  Geogr.  der  Gr.  und  Rom., 
vol.  i.,  pt.  ii.,  p.  285,  seqq.,  as  also  the  dissertations  prefixed  to  Klausen's 
edition. 

V.  PYTHEAS  (lludeas)  of  Massilia,  in  Gaul,  a  celebrated  Greek  naviga 
tor,  sailed  to  the  western  and  northern  parts  of  Europe,  and  wrote  a  work 
containing  the  results  of  his  discoveries.  We  know  nothing  of  his  per 
sonal  history,  with  the  exception  of  the  statement  of  Polybius  that  he 
was  a  poor  man.4  The  time  at  which  he  lived  can  not  be  determined 
with  accuracy  ;  as  he  is  quoted,  however,  by  Dicaearchus,  a  pupil  of  Ar 
istotle,  and  by  Timseus,  he  probably  lived  in  the  time  of  Alexander  the 
Great,  or  shortly  afterward.  It  would  appear  from  Pytheas's  own  state 
ment,  as  related  by  Polybius,  that  he  undertook  two  voyages.  In  one  he 
visited  Britain  and  Thule,  and  of  this  voyage  he  appears  to  have  given 
an  account  in  his  work  "  On  the  Ocean"  (Ilepi  TOV  'n/ceavoD).  In  a  second, 
undertaken  after  his  return  from  his  first  voyage,  he  coasted  along  the 
whole  of  Europe  from  Gadira  (now  Cadiz)  to  the  Tanais,  and  the  descrip 
tion  of  this  second  voyage  probably  formed  the  subject  of  his  Periplus 
,  or,  as  it  is  termed  by  the  scholiast  on  Apollonius  Rhodius,  rfjs 
There  has  been  much  dispute  as  to  what  river  we  are  to  un 
derstand  by  the  Tanais.  The  most  probable  conjecture  appears  to  be, 
that,  upon  reaching  the  Elbe,  Pytheas  concluded  he  had  arrived  at  the 
Tanais,  separating  Europe  from  Asia.5 

1  Polit.,  iii.,  14.  2  philostr.,  Apollon.,  iii.,  47 ;  Harpocrat.,  p.  174,  ed.  Gronov. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.         *  Ap.  Strab.,  ii.,  p.  104.          *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


262  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

The  works  of  Pytheas  are  frequently  referred  to  by  the  ancient  writ 
ers  ;  some,  as,  for  example,  Eratosthenes  and  Hipparchus,  regarding  them 
as  worthy  of  belief ;  but  other  writers,  especially  Polybius  and  Strabo,  re 
gard  them  as  of  no  value  at  all.  Polybius  says  that  it  is  incredible  that  a 
private  man,  and  one  who  was  also  poor,  could  have  undertaken  such 
long  voyages  and  journeys  ;l  and  Strabo,  on  more  than  one  occasion,  calls 
him  a  great  liar,  and  regards  his  statements  as  mere  fables,  only  deserv 
ing  to  be  classed  with  those  of  Euhemerus  and  Antiphanes.2  Most  mod 
ern  writers,  however,  have  been  disposed  to  set  more  value  upon  the  nar 
rative  of  Pytheas.  It  would  appear  from  the  extracts  which  have  been 
preserved  from  his  works,  that  he  did  not  give  simply  the  results  of  his 
own  observations,  but  added  all  the  reports  which  reached  him  respect 
ing  distant  countries,  without  always  drawing  a  distinction  between  what 
he  saw  himself  and  what  was  told  him  by  others.  His  statements,  there 
fore,  must  be  received  with  caution  and  some  mistrust.  It  is  equally  un 
certain  how  far  he  penetrated.  Some  modern  writers  have  regarded  it 
as  certain  that  he  must  have  reached  Iceland,  in  consequence  of  his  re 
mark  that  the  day  was  six  months  long  at  Thule  ;  while  others  have  sup 
posed  that  he  advanced  as  far  as  the  Shetland  islands.  But  either  sup 
position  is  very  improbable,  and  neither  is  necessary  ;  for  reports  of  the 
great  length  of  the  day  and  night  in  the  northern  parts  of  Europe  had  al 
ready  reached  the  Greeks  before  the  time  of  Pytheas.3 

Pytheas  cultivated  science.  He  appears  to  have  been  the  first  person 
that  ascertained  the  latitude  of  a  place  from  the  shadow  of  the  sun,  and 
it  is  expressly  stated  that  he  determined  the  position  of  Massilia  by  ob 
serving  the  shadow  of  the  sun  by  the  gnomon.4  He  also  paid  considera 
ble  attention  to  the  phenomena  of  the  tides,  and  was  well  aware  of  the 
influence  of  the  moon  upon  them. 

The  voyages  of  Pytheas  have  been  discussed  by  a  large  number  of 
modem  writers.  Among  the  most  important  works  on  the  subject  we 
may  name  Bougainville,  Sur  VOrigine  et  sur  les  Voyages  de  Pytheas,  in  the 
Mem.  de  VAcad.  des  Inscript.,  vol.  xix.,  p.  146,  seqq. ;  D'Anvdle,  Sur  la 
Navigation  de  Pythias  a  Thule,  ibid.,  vol.  xxxvii.,  p.  436,  seqq. ;  Ukert, 
Bemerkungen  uler  Pytheas,  in  the  Geogr.  der  Gr.  und  Rom.,  vol.  i.,  pt.  i.,  p. 
298,  seqq. ;  Fuhr,  De  Pythea  Massiliensi  dissertatio,  Darmstadt,  1835  ;  Le- 
lewel,  Pytheas  und  die  Geographic  seiner  Zeit,  &c.,  Leipzig,  1838.  The 
fragments  of  Pytheas  have  been  edited  by  Arwedson,  Upsala,  1824,  8vo. 

1  Polyb.  ap.  Strab.,  ii.,  p.  104.  2  Strab.,  i.,  p.  63 ;  ii.,  p.  102  ;  iii.,  p.  148,  &c. 

3  Smith,  1.  c.  4  Strab.,  ii.,  p.  71,  115. 


ATTIC      PERIOD. 


263 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD— continued. 

II.    SCHOOL    OF     ELOQUENCE. 

INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS.1 

I.  IF  we  take  an  extensive  view  of  ancient  and  modern  literature,  and 
compare  their  several  departments,  in  order  to  form  an  accurate  estimate 
of  their  relative  merit,  the  palm  of  oratory  seems  confessedly  conceded 
to  the  former.     A  review  of  modern  history  presents  to  our  observation 
few  who  deserve  the  name  of  orators,  even  among  those  nations  whose 
governments  would  seem  likely  to  facilitate  the  growth  of  eloquence,  by 
admitting  to  a  share  in  its  Legislature  such  assemblies  as  may  be  sup 
posed  to  lie  under  the  dominion  of  its  influence.     Indeed,  the  slightest 
acquaintance  with  the  records  of  antiquity  is  sufficient  to  teach  us,  that 
the  style  and  character  of  the  eloquence  of  the  ancients  is  materially  dif 
ferent  from  our  own  ;  and,  before  we  proceed  to  give  any  account  of  the 
productions  of  the  Greek  orators,  or  to  introduce  a  sketch  of  their  re 
spective  lives,  it  will  not  be  amiss  to  make  some  preliminary  observa 
tions  on  the  causes  of  their  vast  and  acknowledged  superiority. 

II.  Without  inquiring  into  the  extent  of  that  influence  which  climate 
may  exercise  over  national  character,  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  geo 
graphical  situation  of  Greece  was  eminently  favorable  to  the  development 
of  intellectual  power,  and  to  that  peculiarly  nice  organization  by  which 
delicacy  of  feeling  is  refined  even  to  fastidiousness.     That  the  Athenians 
did  possess  this  exquisite  susceptibility,  we  know  as  well  by  several  his 
torical  anecdotes   as  by  the  direct   and  explicit  testimony  of  Cicero. 
Speaking  of  this  extraordinary  people,  he  says,  "  Sincerum  fuit  eorum 
judicium,  nihilut  possent  nisi  incorruptum  audirc  atque  elcgans."2     So  fault 
less  was  their  judgment,  that  they  would  listen  to  nothing  but  what  was 
pure  and  elegant.     A  tribunal,  then,  whose  discrimination  was  so  keen, 
whose  taste  was  so  fastidious,  and  from  whose  authority  there  was  no 
appeal,  would,  by  the  very  severity  of  its  decisions,  call  forth  productions 
of  finished  excellence  from  those  who  were  conscious  of  talents  which 
deserved  approbation,  and  were  stimulated  by  ambition  to  pursue  it. 
Such  a  tribunal,  though  it  might  intimidate  and  abash  minds  of  inferior 
calibre,  would  urge  to  active  industry  and  unwearied  perseverance  those 
more  eminent  abilities  which  no  difficulties  can  alarm,  and  no  disappoint 
ment  effectually  retard. 

III.  Accordingly,  we  find  that  among  the  ancients  the  study  of  elo 
quence  was,  as  it  were,  almost  the  occupation  of  life,  and  the  splendor 
of  their  success  is  only  proportionate  to  the  vigor  of  their  exertions.    The 
laborious  diligence  of  Demosthenes,  his  careful  correction  of  natural  de 
fects,  his  seclusion  from  society,  and  his  earnest  zeal  in  preparing  him- 

1  Ottlty,  Greek  Orators,  Encyc.  Metropol.  2  Cic.,  De  Orat.,  viii.,  25. 


264  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

self  for  the  career  of  a  public  speaker,  are  familiar  to  every  one.  The 
moderns  may  have  the  same  powers  of  genius,  and  the  same  indefatigable 
application  as  orators — both  parties  must  have  aimed  at  persuasion  ;  but 
some  of  the  means  which  one  employed  are  either  above  or  beneath  the 
other.  In  fact,  our  scholastic  pursuits  were  an  Athenian's  leisure  occu 
pation  (o-%oA.^) ;  his  business  was  politics  ;  literature  was  his  recreation, 
and  he  found  both  in  the  speeches  of  the  public  orator.  These  were  al 
lied  to  politics  by  their  subject,  to  music  by  their  rhythm,  and  by  attitude, 
gesture,  and  action  to  the  drama.  Hence  some  of  their  beauties,  expect 
ed  and  admired  by  an  Athenian  audience,  would  be  thrown  away  upon  a 
modern  assembly ;  they  would  be  too  visibly  artificial  to  be  persuasive. 
Legislative  assemblies  at  the  present  day  are  too  practical,  too  intent 
generally  on  business,  to  care  much  about  the  rhythmical  structure  of 
sentences.  As,  on  the  one  hand,  modern  orators  could  not,  perhaps  (a 
few  rare  cases  excepted),  copy  the  vehement  reasoning,  the  energy,  and 
earnest  boldness  of  Demosthenes,  there  are,  on  the  other  hand,  beauties 
of  style  in  the  structure  of  his  sentences  which  they  would  not  copy  if 
they  could.  So,  again,  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus  praises  the  dignity 
and  magnificence  with  which  the  funeral  oration  of  Pericles  opens  ;  then 
he  accounts  for  these  excellencies  by  remarking  that  the  first  period  con 
tains  three  spondees,  then  an  anapaest,  then  a  spondee,  then  a  cretic, 
"  all  dignified  feet"  (airavres  a^uaTtKoi).1  Praise  of  this  kind  does  not 
occur  to  any  one  who  enjoys  or  recommends  a  speech  of  Burke  or  of  Fox, 
of  Clay  or  of  Webster ;  yet,  no  doubt,  these  dignified  feet  were  important 
beauties  to  the  ears  of  the  Athenian  assembly,  and  the  supply  was  ad 
justed  to  the  demand. 

IV.  Cicero,  in  his  celebrated  treatise  "  De  Oratorc"*  has  left  us  much 
valuable  information  respecting  the  Greek  orators.  From  them  he  learned 
the  graces  which  eloquence  is  capable  of  assuming,  and  the  deep  and 
durable  impression  which  it  makes  on  the  minds  both  of  the  learned  and 
the  illiterate.     His  estimate  of  what  an  orator  ought  to  be  was  formed 
by  what  the  Greeks  had  actually  done ;  and  we  may  therefore  learn,  in 
some  measure,  from  his  precepts,  the  nature  and  extent  of  their  exer 
tions  in  the  prosecution  of  their  favorite  pursuit.     After  enumerating 
some  exercises,  such  as  speaking  extempore,  and  from  memory,  or  re 
peating,  in  Latin,  orations  which  had  been  read  in  Greek — exercises,  the 
habitual  practice  of  which  was  necessary  to  the  attainment  of  eloquence 
— he  contends  that  an  almost  universal  knowledge  is  essentially  requisite 
to  perfection  in  this  noble  art,  enumerating,  among  other  things,  an  ac 
quaintance  with  the  poets,  or,  as  we  would  say,  a  full  course  of  belles- 
lettres  studies  ;  a  thorough  knowledge  of  history,  of  the  principles  and 
constitution  of  the  republic,  of  law  in  general  and  the  municipal  code  in 
particular,  of  philosophy  and  the  moral  nature  and  habits  of  men. 

V.  If,  then,  such  were  the  earnestness  and  zeal  with  which  the  an 
cients  cultivated  the  art  of  eloquence,  and  so  wide  the  range  of  learning 
which  they  brought  to  bear  upon  it ;  if  the  audience,  to  whose  judgment 
their  speeches  were  submitted,  wrere  so  alive  to  the  perception  of  beau- 

i  Dion.  Hal,  De  Verb.  Comp.,  t)  xviii.,  p.  114,  ed.  Reiske.          2  Cic.,  De  Orat.,  i.,  34. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  265 

ties,  and  so  keen  in  discovering  defects,  we  need  not  wonder  that  the 
superior  excellence  of  the  Greek  orators  is  so  vast  and  indisputable. 
As  the  prize  for  which  these  intellectual  gladiators  contended  was  valu 
able,  so  the  weapon  they  employed  combined  the  highest  polish  with  the 
greatest  strength.  Those  who  are  familiar  with  the  Greek  language 
need  not  to  be  reminded  of  its  unrivalled  copiousness  of  expression,  its 
majesty,  elegance,  and  compactness,  its  unlimited  range  of  compound 
words,  and  the  flexible  ductility  with  which  it  lends  itself  to  convey  ev 
ery  variety  of  meaning.  The  power  of  such  an  instrument  was  only  to 
be  surpassed  by  the  skill  of  those  who  wielded  it.  The  democratic  gov 
ernment  of  Athens,  its  foreign  wars  and  domestic  discord,  furnished  the 
Greek  orators  with  ample  materials  for  the  employment  of  their  elo 
quence  ;  and  successful  exertions  were  crowned,  not  only  with  the  pleas 
ing  tribute  of  popular  applause,  but  the  more  profitable  reward  of  political 
power. 

VI.  Such,  then,  were  some  of  the  causes  which  promoted  the  growth 
and  secured  the  celebrity  of  eloquence  in  Greece,  or,  to  speak  more  prop 
erly,  at  Athens.  Oratory,  in  fact,  flourished  only  at  Athens ;  and  while 

other  states  arrest  attention  by  occasional  periods  of  military  glory 

while  Sparta  excites  astonishment  by  the  extreme  austerity  of  its  national 
manners,  and  the  singularity  of  its  political  institutions,  history  does  not 
inform  us  that  these  republics  produced  any  individual  whose  eloquence 
elevated  him  to  importance  during  his  life,  or  secured  his  posthumous 
renown.1 

HISTORY     OF     ELOQUENCE     AMONG     THE     GREEKS.2 

I.  Public  speaking  had  been  common  in  Greece  from  the  earliest  times. 
Long  before  popular  assemblies  had  gained  the  sovereign  power  by  the 
establishment  of  democracy,  the  ancient  kings  had  been  in  the  habit  of 
addressing  their  people,  sometimes  with  that  natural  eloquence  which 
Homer  ascribes  to  Ulysses,  at  other  times,  like  Menelaus,  with  concise 
but  persuasive  diction.     Hesiod  assigns  to  kings  a  muse  of  their  own- 
Calliope— by  whose  aid  they  were  enabled  to  speak  convincingly  and 
persuasively  in  the  popular  assembly  and  from  the  seat  of  judgment. 
With  the  farther  development  of  republican  constitutions  after  the  age 
of  Homer  and  Hesiod,  public  officers  and  demagogues  without  number 
had  spoken  in  the  public  meetings,  or  in  the  deliberative  councils  of  the 
numerous  independent  states,  and  no  doubt  they  often  spoke  eloquently 
and  wisely ;  but  these  speeches  did  not  survive  the  particular  occasion 
which  called  them  forth. 

II.  Turning  to  Athens,  the  native  soil  of  oratory,  the  first  great  name 
that  arrests  our  attention  in  the  department  of  public  speaking  is  that  of 
PERICLES.     It  is  manifest,from  the  whole  political  career  of  this  eminent 
statesman,  that  while,  on  the  one  hand,  he  presupposed  in  the  Athenian 
people  a  power  of  governing  themselves,  so,  on  the  other,  he  wished  to 
prevent  the  state  from  becoming  a  mere  stake,  to  be  played  for  by  ambi- 
tious  demagogues  ;  for  he  favored  every  institution  which  gave  the  poorer 

1  Cic.,  Brut.,  13  ;  Veil.  Paterc.,  i.,  18.  2  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  f>7. 

M 


266  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

citizens  a  share  in  the  government ;  he  encouraged  every  thing  which 
might  contribute  to  extend  education  and  knowledge  ;  and  by  his  aston 
ishing  expenditure  on  w^orks  of  architecture  and  sculpture,  he  gave  the 
people  a  decided  fondness  for  the  grand  and  beautiful.  And  thus  the  ap 
pearance  of  Pericles  on  the  bema  (which  he  purposely  reserved  for  great 
occasions)  was  not  intended  merely  to  aid  the  passing  of  some  law,  but 
was,  at  the  same  time,  calculated  to  infuse  a  noble  spirit  into  the  general 
politics  of  Athens,  to  guide  the  views  of  the  Athenians  in  regard  to  their 
external  relations,  and  all  the  difficulties  of  their  position  ;  and  it  was  the 
wish  of  this  true  friend  of  the  people  that  all  this  might  long  survive 
himself.  This  is  obviously  the  opinion  of  Thucydides,  whom  we  may 
consider  as  in  many  respects  a  worthy  disciple  of  the  school  of  Pericles  ; 
and  this  is  the  representation  which  he  has  given  us  of  the  oratory  of  that 
statesman  in  the  three  speeches  (all  of  them  delivered  on  important  oc 
casions)  which  he  has  put  into  his  mouth.1 

III.  This  wonderful  triad  of  speeches  forms  a  beautiful  whole,  which  is 
perfect  and  complete  in  itself.     The  first  speech  proves  the  necessity  of 
a  war  with  the  Peloponnesians,  and  the  probability  that  it  will  be  suc 
cessful  ;  the  second,  delivered  immediately  after  the  first  successes  ob 
tained  in  the  war,  under  the  form  of  a  funeral  oration,  confirms  the  Athe 
nians  in  their  mode  of  living  and  acting.     It  is  half  an  apology  for,  half 
a  panegyric  upon  Athens  :  it  is  full  of  a  sense  of  truth,  and  of  noble  self- 
reliance,  tempered  with  moderation.     The  third,  delivered  after  the  ca 
lamities  which  had  befallen  Athens,  rather  through  the  plague  than 
through  the  war,  and  which  had  nevertheless  made  the  people  vacillate 
in  their  resolutions,  offers  the  consolation  most  worthy  of  a  noble  heart, 
namely,  that  up  to  that  time  fortune,  on  which  no  man  can  count,  had 
deceived  them,  but  they  had  not  been  misled  by  their  own  calculations 
and  convictions ;  and  that  these  would  never  deceive  them,  if  they  did 
not  allow  themselves  to  be  led  astray  by  some  unforeseen  accidents.2 

IV.  No  speech  of  Pericles  has  been  preserved  in  writing.     It  may  seem 
surprising  that  no  attempt  was  made  to  write  down  and  preserve,  for  the 
benefit  of  the  present  and  future  generations,  works  which  every  one 
considered  admirable,  and  which  were  regarded  as,  in  some  respects,  the 
most  perfect  specimens  of  oratory.     The  only  explanation  of  this  that 
can  be  offered  is,  that  in  those  days  a  speech  was  not  considered  as  pos 
sessing  any  value  or  interest,  save  in  reference  to  the  particular  practi 
cal  object  for  which  it  was  designed.     It  had  never  occurred  to  people 
that  speeches  and  poems  might  be  placed  in  one  class,  and  both  preserved 
without  reference  to  their  subjects,  on  account  of  the  skill  with  which 
the  subjects  were  treated,  and  the  general  beauties  of  the  form  and  com 
position.     Only  a  few  emphatic  and  nervous  expressions  of  Pericles  were 
kept  in  remembrance  ;  but  a  general  impression  of  the  grandeur  and  co 
piousness  of  his  oratory  long  prevailed  among  the  Greeks.3 

V.  We  have  said  that  Athens  was  the  native  soil  of  oratory,  a  remark 
that  must  not,  however,  be  construed  so  strictly  as  to  prove  any  dispar 
agement  to  the  Sicilian  Greeks,  and  especially  the  Syracusans,  whose 

i  Muller,  1.  c.  2  Id.  ili,  3  Id.  ib. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  267 

lively  disposition  and  natural  quickness  raised  them,  more  than  any  other 
Dorian  people,  to  a  level  with  the  Athenians,  and  who  had  commenced, 
even  earlier  than  the  people  of  Attica,  the  study  of  an  artificial  rhetoric 
useful  for  the  discussions  of  the  law-courts.  The  situation  of  Syracuse, 
at  the  time  of  the  Persian  war,  had  contributed  a  good  deal  to  awaken 
their  natural  inclination  and  capacity  for  such  a  study  ;  especially  by  the 
impulse  which  the  abolition  of  arbitrary  government  had  given  to  demo 
cratic  sentiments,  and  by  the  complicated  transactions  which  sprang  up 
from  the  renewal  of  private  claims  long  suppressed  by  the  tyrants.1 

VI.  At  this  time,  CORAX,  who  had  been  highly  esteemed  by  the  tyrant 
Hiero,  came  forward  in  a  conspicuous  manner,  both  as  a  public  orator  and 
as  a  pleader  in  the  law  courts.     His  great  practice  led  him  to  consider 
more  accurately  the  principles  of  his  art ;  and  at  last  it  occurred  to  him 
to  write  a  work  on  the  subject.     This  book,  like  the  innumerable  treat 
ises  which  succeeded  it,  was  entitled  Te'x^  'P^Topjm^,  "  the  Art  of  Rhet 
oric,"  or  simply  Te'xvTj,  "  the  Art."     This  work  is  worthy  of  notice  as 
the  first  of  its  kind,  not  only  among  the  Greeks,  but  perhaps  also  in  the 
whole  world.     All  that  we  know  of  it  is,  that  it  laid  down  a  regular  form 
and  regular  divisions  for  the  oration,  which,  above  all,  was  to  begin  with  a 
distinct  prooemium,  calculated  to  put  the  hearers  in  a  favorable  train,  and 
to  conciliate  their  good-will  at  the  very  opening  of  the  speech.     Accord 
ing  to  some,  Corax  would  seem  not  to  have  been  a  pleader  in  the  law 
courts,  but  merely  a  composer  of  speeches  for  others,  since  it  is  doubt 
ful  whether  there  was  an  establishment  of  patroni  and  causidici  at  Syra 
cuse  as  at  Rome,  or  whether  every  one  was  compelled  to  plead  his  own 
cause,  as  at  Athens,  in  which  case  he  was  always  able  to  get  his  speech 
made  for  him  by  some  professed  rhetorician.2 

VII.  TISIAS  was  first  a  pupil,  and  afterward  a  rival  of  Corax.     He  also 
was  known  not  only  as  a  public  speaker,  but  likewise  as  the  author  of  a 
Te'x^rj.     GoRGiAs,3  again,  was  the  pupil  of  Tisias,  and  followed  closely  in 
his  steps.     Gorgias  was  a  native  of  Leontini,  a  Chalcidian  colony  in  Si 
cily.     He  was  somewhat  older  than  the  Attic  orator  Antiphon  (born  in 
B.C.  480  or  479),  and  lived  to  such  an  advanced  age  (some  say  105,  and 
others  109  years),  that  he  survived  Socrates,  though  probably  only  a  short 
time.     According  to  the  common  account,  he  was  sent  by  his  fellow-citi 
zens,  when  advanced  in  years  (B.C.  427),  as  ambassador  to  Athens,  for  the 
purpose  of  soliciting  its  protection  against  the  threatening  power  of  Syra 
cuse.     Another  account  makes  Tisias  to  have  been  his  colleague  on  the 
occasion.     Through  Gorgias  this  artificial  rhetoric  obtained  more  fame 
and  glory  than  fell  to  the  share  of  any  other  branch  of  literature.     The 
Athenians,  to  whom  this  Sicilian  rhetoric  was  still  a  novelty,  though  they 
were  fully  qualified  and  predisposed  to  enjoy  its  beauties,  were  quite  en 
chanted  with  it,  and  it  soon  became  fashionable  to  speak  like  Gorgias. 
The  impression  produced  by  his  oratory  was  greatly  increased  by  his 
stately  appearance,  his  well-chosen  and  splendid  costume,  and  the  self- 
possession  and  confidence  of  his  demeanor.     Besides,  his  rhetoric  rested 
on  a  basis  of  philosophy,  which  taught  that  the  sole  aim  of  the  orator  is 

1  Muller,  1.  c.,  p.  75.  2  Id.  ib.  s  Id.,  p.  73  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


268  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

to  turn  the  minds  of  his  hearers  into  such  a  train  as  may  best  consist 
with  his  own  interests ;  that,  consequently,  rhetoric  is  the  agent  of  per 
suasion,  the  art  of  all  arts,  because  the  rhetorician  is  able  to  speak  well 
and  convincingly  on  every  subject,  even  though  he  has  no  accurate  knowl 
edge  respecting  it.1 

In  accordance  with  this  view  of  rhetoric,  Gorgias  took  little  pains  with 
the  subject-matter  of  his  speeches  ;  he  only  concerned  himself  about  this 
so  far  as  to  exercise  himself  in  treating  of  general  topics,  which  were 
called  loci  communes,  and  the  proper  application  and  management  of  which 
have  always  helped  the  rhetorician  to  conceal  his  ignorance.  The  chief 
study  of  Gorgias,  however,  was  directed  to  the  form  of  expression.  His 
oratory  was  chiefly  calculated  to  tickle  the  ear  by  antitheses,  by  combina 
tions  of  words  of  similar  sound,  by  the  symmetry  of  its  parts  and  similar 
artifices,  and  to  dazzle  by  metaphors,  allegories,  repetitions,  apostrophes, 
and  the  like  ;  by  novel  images,  poetical  circumlocutions,  and  high-sound 
ing  expressions,  and  sometimes  also  by  a  strain  of  irony.  He,  lastly,  tried 
to  charm  his  hearers  by  a  symmetrical  arrangement  of  his  periods.  But 
as  these  artifices,  in  the  application  of  which  he  is  said  to  have  often 
shown  real  grandeur,  earnestness,  and  elegance,  were  made  use  of  too 
profusely,  and  for  the  purpose  of  giving  undue  prominence  to  poor  thoughts, 
his  orations  did  not  excite  the  feelings  of  his  hearers,  and,  at  all  events, 
could  produce  only  a  momentary  impression.  This  was  the  case  with  his 
oration  addressed  to  the  assembled  Greeks  at  Olympia,  exhorting  them  to 
union  against  their  common  enemy,  and  with  the  funeral  oration  which 
he  wrote  at  Athens,  though  he  probably  did  not  deliver  it  in  public  ;  and 
a  fragment  of  which  is  preserved  by  the  scholiast  on  Hermogenes.2 

Gorgias  seems  to  have  returned  to  Leontini,  but  only  for  a  short  time, 
and  to  have  spent  the  remaining  years  of  his  vigorous  old  age  in  the  towns 
of  Greece  proper,  especially  at  Athens  and  the  Thessalian  Larissa,  en 
joying  honor  every  where  as  an  orator  and  teacher  of  rhetoric.  Besides 
Polus,  of  Agrigentum,  his  favorite  scholar  and  devoted  partisan,  who  is 
described  in  such  lively  colors  in  the  Gorgias  of  Plato,  such  men  as  Al- 
cibiades,  Critias,  Alcidamas,  ^Eschines,  and  Antisthenes,  are  called  either 
pupils  or  imitators  of  Gorgias.  We  will  return  to  this  individual  in  our 
remarks  on  the  Sophists. 

Two  declamations  have  come  down  to  us  under  the  name  of  Gorgias, 
viz.,  the  Apology  of  Palamedes,  and  the  Encomium  on  Helena.  Their  gen 
uineness  is  maintained  by  Reiske,  Geel,  and  Schonborn,  and  doubted  by 
Voss  and  others.  It  is  difficult  to  give  any  decisive  opinion  on  the  sub 
ject,  since  the  characteristic  peculiarities  of  the  oratory  of  Gorgias,  which 
appear  in  these  declamations,  especially  in  the  former,  might  very  well 
have  been  imitated  by  a  skillful  rhetorician  of  later  times.  These  decla 
mations  are  given  by  Reiske  in  the  eighth  volume  of  his  Or  at  ores  Greed ; 
by  Bekker,  in  the  fifth  volume  of  his  Oratores  Attici ;  and  by  Mullach,  Ber 
lin,  1845.  

i  Mutter,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  77.  2  Id.  ib. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  269 


ATTIC     ORATORS. 

VIII.  The  cultivation  of  the  art  of  oratory  among  the  Athenians  is  due 
to  a  combination  of  the  natural  eloquence  displayed  by  the  Athenian 
statesmen,  and  especially  by  Pericles,  with  the  rhetorical  studies  intro 
duced  by  Gorgias.  The  first  person  in  whom  the  effects  of  this  combi 
nation  were  fully  shown  was  Antiphon,  who  was  both  a  practical  states 
man  and  man  of  business,  and  also  a  rhetorician  of  the  schools.1  The 
canon  of  Attic  orators,  as  settled  in  a  later  age  by  the  Alexandrine  gram 
marians,  commences  therefore  with  his  name.  This  canon  contains  ten 
names,  given  in  chronological  order,  as  follows  :  Antiphon,  Andocides,  Lys- 
ias,  Isocrates,  Istxus,  JEschines,  Lycurgus,  Demosthenes,  Hyperldes,  and  Di- 
narchus.  These  ten  are  known  by  the  appellation  of  the  Ten  Attic  Ora 
tors,  and  we  shall  proceed  to  consider  them  in  the  order  in  which  they 
have  been  named. 

1.  ANTIPHON  ('Aj/rt^xw'),2  the  most  ancient  of  the  ten  Attic  orators  in 
the  Alexandrine  canon,  was  a  son  of  Sophilus  the  sophist,  and  born  at 
Rhamnus,  in  Attica,  B.C.  480.3  He  was  a  man  of  eminent  talent  and 
firm  character,4  and  is  said  to  have  been  educated  partly  by  his  father 
and  partly  by  Pythodorus,  while,  according  to  others,  he  owed  his  educa 
tion  to  no  one  but  himself.  When  he  was  a  young  man,  the  fame  of 
Gorgias  was  at  its  height.  The  object  of  Gorgias's  sophistical  school  of 
oratory,  as  already  remarked,  was  more  to  dazzle  and  captivate  the  hearer 
by  brilliancy  of  diction  and  rhetorical  artifices,  than  to  produce  a  solid 
conviction  based  upon  sound  arguments.  Antiphon  perceived  this  defi 
ciency,  and  formed  a  higher  and  more  practical  view  of  the  art  to  which 
he  devoted  himself;  that  is,  he  wished  to  produce  conviction  in  the  minds 
of  the  hearers  by  means  of  a  thorough  examination  of  the  subjects  pro 
posed,  and  this  not  with  a  view  to  the  narrow  limits  of  the  school,  but  to 
the  courts  and  the  public  assembly.  Hence  the  ancients  call  Antiphon 
the  inventor  of  public  oratory,  or  state  that  he  raised  it  to  a  higher  posi 
tion.5  Antiphon  was  thus  the  first  who  regulated  practical  eloquence  by 
certain  theoretical  laws,  and  he  opened  a  school  in  which  he  taught 
rhetoric. 

Thucydides  the  historian,  a  pupil  of  Antiphon,  speaks  of  his  master  with 
the  highest  esteem,  and  many  of  the  excellences  of  his  style  are  ascribed 
by  the  ancients  to  the  influence  of  Antiphon.6  At  the  same  time,  Anti 
phon  occupied  himself  with  writing  speeches  for  others,  who  delivered 
them  in  the  courts  of  justice  ;  and  as  he  was  the  first  who  received  money 
for  such  orations — a  practice  which  subsequently  became  quite  general — 
he  was  severely  attacked  and  ridiculed,  especially  by  the  comic  writers 
Plato  and  Pisander.7  These  attacks,  however,  may  also  have  been  owing 
to  his  political  opinions,  for  he  belonged  to  the  oligarchical  party.  This 

1  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  79.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  832,  B.  4  Thucyd.,  viii.,  88 ;  Pint.,  Nic.>  6. 

5  Philostr.,  Vit.  Soph.,  i.,  15,  2  ;  Hermog.,  De  Form.,  ii.,  p.  498. 

6  Schol.  ad  Thucyd.,  iv.,  p.  312,  ed.  Bckker. 

7  Philostr.,  I.  c. ;  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  833,  ('. 


270  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

unpopularity,  together  with  his  own  reserved  character,  prevented  his 
ever  appearing  as  a  speaker,  either  in  the  courts  or  in  the  assembly ;  and 
the  only  time  he  spoke  in  public  was  in  B.C.  411,  when,  on  the  overthrow 
of  the  oligarchical  government,  Antiphon  was  brought  to  trial  for  having 
attempted  to  negotiate  peace  with  Sparta,  and  was  condemned  to  death. 
,His  speech  in  defence  of  himself  is  stated  by  Thucydides1  to  have  been 
the  ablest  that  was  ever  made  by  any  man  in  similar  circumstances.  It 
is  now  lost,  but  was  known  to  the  ancients,  and  is  referred  to  by  Harpo- 
cration,  who  calls  it  \6yos  irepl  fj-eraffrdo-fus.  His  property  was  confisca 
ted,  his  house  razed  to  the  ground,  and  on  the  site  of  it  a  tablet  was 
erected  with  the  inscription  "Antiphon  the  Traitor."  His  remains  were 
not  allowed  to  be  buried  in  Attic  ground ;  his  children,  as  well  as  any 
one  who  should  adopt  them,  were  punished  with  atimia. 

As  an  orator,  Antiphon  was  highly  esteemed  by  the  ancients.  Her- 
mogenes2  says  of  his  orations  that  they  were  clear,  true  in  the  expression 
of  feeling,  and  faithful  to  nature,  and  consequently  convincing.  Others 
say  that  his  orations  were  beautiful  but  not  graceful,  or  that  they  had 
something  austere  or  antique  about  them.  The  want  of  freshness  and 
gracefulness  is  very  obvious  in  the  orations  still  extant,  but  more  espe 
cially  in  those  actually  spoken  by  Antiphon's  clients.  His  language  is 
pure  and  correct,  and  the  treatment  and  solution  of  the  point  at  issue  are 
always  striking  and  interesting.3 

The  ancients  possessed  sixty  orations  of  different  kinds  which  went 
by  the  name  of  Antiphon,  but  Csecilius,  a  rhetorician  of  the  Augustan 
Age,  declared  twenty-five  to  be  spurious.4  We  now  possess  only  fifteen 
orations  of  Antiphon,  three  of  which  were  written  by  him  for  others. 
The  remaining  twelve  were  composed  as  specimens  for  his  school,  or 
exercises  on  fictitious  cases.  They  are  a  peculiar  phenomenon  in  the 
history  of  ancient  oratory,  for  they  are  divided  into  three  tetralogies,  each 
of  which  consists  of  four  orations,  two  accusations  and  two  defences  on 
the  same  subject.  The  subject  of  the  first  tetralogy  is  a  murder,  the 
perpetrator  of  which  is  yet  unknown ;  that  of  the  second  an  unpremedi 
tated  murder ;  and  that  of  the  third  a  murder  committed  in  self  defence. 
The  clearness  which  distinguishes  his  other  three  orations  is  not  per 
ceptible  in  these  tetralogies,  which  arises  in  part  from  the  corrupt  and 
mutilated  state  in  which  they  have  come  down  to  us.  A  great  number 
of  the  orations  of  Antiphon,  and  in  fact  all  those  which  are  extant,  have 
for  their  subject  the  commission  of  a  murder,  whence  they  are  sometimes 
referred  to  under  the  name  of  \6yoi  (poviKoi*  The  three  real  speeches — 
the  tetralogies  must  be  left  out  of  the  question  here — contain  more  infor 
mation  than  any  other  ancient  writings  respecting  the  mode  of  proceed 
ing  in  the  criminal  courts  at  Athens.  Besides  the  orations,  the  ancients 
ascribe  to  Antiphon,  1.  A  treatise  on  "Rhetoric"  (Te'x^  pi)TopiK-ri),  in  three 
books.  This  work  is  occasionally  referred  to  by  ancient  rhetoricians  and 
grammarians,  but  is  now  lost.  2.  npooi/Ma  Kal  '£71-1X070*.  These  seem  to 
have  been  model-speeches  or  exercises,  for  the  use  of  himself  or  his 

1  viii.,  68.         3  De  Form.,  p.  497.          3  Dionys.,  Jud.  dc  Thucyd.,  51 ;  Phot.,  p.  485. 
*  Pint.,  Vit,  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  833,  B.  5  Hermog.,  De  Form.,  p.  496,  seqq. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  271 

scholars  ;  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  his  tetralogies  may  have  belonged 
to  them. 

The  orations  of  Antiphon  are  printed  in  the  collections  of  the  Attic  orators,  edited  by 
Aldus  (Venice,  1513,  fol.),  H.  Stephens  (Paris,  1575,  fol.),  Reiske  (Leipzig,  1770-75,  12 
volumes  8vo),  Bekker  (Oxford,  1822-3,  4  volumes  8vo ;  reprinted  Berlin,  1823-4,  5  vol 
umes  8vo),  Dobson  (London,  1828,  16  volumes  8vo),  Baiter  and  Sauppe  (Zurich,  1838- 
45,  4to),  and  others.  The  best  separate  editions  are  those  of  Baiter  and  Sauppe  (the  text 
merely),  Ziirich,  1838, 16mo,  and  Matzner,  Berlin,  1838,  8vo,  the  last  with  critical  notes 
and  commentary.  The  best  modern  works  on  Antiphon  are,  P.  Van  Spaan  (Ruhnken), 
Dissertatio  de  Antiphonte,  Oratorc  Attico,  Leyden,  1765,  4to,  reprinted  in  Iluhnken's  Opus- 
cula,  and  in  Reiske's  and  Dobson's  Greek  Orators;  Taylor,  Lect.  Lysiac.,  vii.,  p.  848, 
seqq.,  ed.  Reiske  ;  and  Westermann,  Geschichte  der  Gricch.  Bcredtsamkeit,  t)  40,  seq.  The 
student  may  consult  also  Dobree's  "  Annot.  in  Antiphontem,"  in  Scholefield's  edition  of 
Dobree's  Adversaria,  Cambridge,  1831,  and  in  Dobson's  Attic  Orators. 

2.  ANDOCIDES  ('ApSo/aSTjs)1  was  born  at  Athens  in  B.C.  467.  He  be 
longed  to  a  noble  family,2  and  was  a  supporter  of  the  oligarchical  party 
at  Athens,  and  through  their  influence  obtained,  in  B.C.  436,  together 
with  Glaucon,  the  command  of  a  fleet  of  twenty  sail,  which  was  to  pro 
tect  the  Corcyreans  against  the  Corinthians.3  After  this  he  seems  to 
have  been  employed  on  various  occasions  as  ambassador  to  Thessaly, 
Macedonia,  Molossia,  Thesprotia,  Italy,  and  Sicily  ;4  and,  although  he  was 
frequently  attacked  for  his  political  opinions,  he  yet  maintained  his  ground, 
until  in  B.C.  415,  when  he  became  involved  in  the  charge  brought  against 
Alcibiades  for  having  profaned  the  mysteries  and  mutilated  the  Herman 
It  appeared  the  more  likely  that  Andocides  was  an  accomplice  in  the  lat 
ter  of  these  crimes,  which  was  believed  to  be  a  preliminary  step  toward 
overthrowing  the  democratical  constitution,  since  the  Hermes  standing 
close  to  his  house  was  among  the  very  few  which  had  not  been  injured.8 
Andocides  was  accordingly  seized  and  thrown  into  prison,  but  after  some 
time  recovered  his  liberty  by  a  promise  that  he  would  reveal  the  names 
of  the  real  perpetrators  of  the  crime  ;  and,  on  the  suggestion  of  one  Char- 
mides  or  Timseus,6  he  mentioned  four,  all  of  whom  were  put  to  death. 
He  is  said  to  have  also  denounced  his  own  father,  but  to  have  rescued 
him  again  in  the  hour  of  danger.  But  as  Andocides  was  unable  to  clear 
himself  from  the  charge,  he  was  deprived  of  his  rights  as  a  citizen,  and 
left  Athens.7 

He  returned  to  Athens  on  the  establishment  of  the  government  of  the 
Four  Hundred  in  411,  but  was  soon  obliged  to  fly  again.8  In  the  follow 
ing  year  he  ventured  once  more  to  return  to  Athens,  and  it  was  at  this 
time  that  he  delivered  the  speech  still  extant,  On  his  Return  (Flepi  rrjs 
eauroG  /caflo'Sou),  in  which  he  petitioned  for  permission  to  reside  at  Athens, 
but  in  vain.  He  was  thus  driven  into  exile  a  third  time,  and  went  to  re 
side  at  Elis.9  In  B.C.  403  he  again  returned  to  Athens,  upon  the  over 
throw  of  the  tyranny  of  the  Thirty  by  Thrasybulus,  and  the  proclamation 
of  the  general  amnesty.  He  was  now  allowed  to  remain  quietly  at  Ath 
ens  for  the  next  three  years,  but  in  B.C.  400  his  enemies  accused  him 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Oral.,  p.  834,  B. 

3  Thucyd.,  i.,  51 ;  Plut.,  I.  c.  4  Andoc.  c.  Alcib.,  §  41. 

s  Plut.,  1.  c. ;  Nepos.,  Alcib.,  3.  6  De  Myst.,  <)  48  ;  Plut.,  Alcib.,  21. 

7  DeRetL,  $  25.  8  ]jys,  c,  Andoc.,  $  29.  9  Plut.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  835,  A. 


272 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


of  having  profaned  the  mysteries.  He  defended  himself  in  the  oration 
still  extant,  On  the  Mysteries  (Ilepi  ruv  MucrrTypiW),  and  was  acquitted. 
In  B.C.  394  he  was  sent  as  ambassador  to  Sparta,  to  conclude  a  peace, 
and  on  his  return,  in  393,  he  was  accused  of  illegal  conduct  (Trapairpeff- 
/3eias)  during  his  embassy.  He  defended  himself  in  the  extant  speech  On 
the  Peace  with  Lacedamon  (Ilept  TTJS  Trpbs  Aa/ceScu^oi/i'ous  dp-fi^s),  but  was 
found  guilty,  and  sent  into  exile  for  the  fourth  time.  He  seems  to  have 
died  soon  afterward  in  exile. 

Andocides  appears  to  have  left  no  issue,  since  at  the  age  of  seventy  he 
had  no  children,1  though  the  scholiast  on  Aristophanes  mentions  Anti- 
phon  as  a  son  of  Andocides.  This  was  probably  owing  to  his  wandering 
and  unsteady  life,  as  well  as  to  his  dissolute  character.2  The  large  for 
tune  which  he  inherited  from  his  father,  or  acquired  in  his  commercial 
undertakings,  was  greatly  diminished  in  the  latter  years  of  his  life.3  An 
docides  has  no  claim  to  the  esteem  of  posterity  either  as  a  man  or  as  a 
citizen.  Besides  the  three  orations  already  mentioned,  which  are  un 
doubtedly  genuine,  there  is  a  fourth,  against  Alcibiades  (Kara  'AA/ajStaSov), 
said  to  have  been  delivered  by  Andocides  in  B.C.  415,  but  it  is  in  all  prob 
ability  spurious,  though  it  appears  to  contain  genuine  historical  matter. 
Taylor  ascribed  it  to  Phaeax,  while  others  think  it  more  probable  that  it 
is  the  work  of  some  one  of  the  later  rhetoricians,  with  whom  the  accusa 
tion  or  defence  of  Alcibiades  was  a  standing  theme.  Besides  these  four 
orations  we  possess  only  a  few  fragments,  and  some  very  vague  allusions 
to  other  orations. 

As  an  orator  Andocides  does  not  appear  to  have  been  held  in  very  high 
esteem  by  the  ancients,  as  he  is  seldom  mentioned,  though  Valerius  The- 
on  is  said  to  have  written  a  commentary  on  his  orations.  We  do  not  hear 
of  his  having  been  trained  in  any  of  the  sophistical  schools  of  the  time, 
and  he  had  probably  developed  his  talents  in  the  practical  school  of  the 
popular  assembly.  Hence  his  orations  have  no  mannerism  in  them,  and 
are  really,  as  Plutarch  says,  simple,  and  free  from  all  rhetorical  pomp  and 
ornament.  Sometimes,  however,  his  style  is  diffuse,  and  becomes  tedi 
ous  and  obscure.  The  best  among  the  orations  is  that  on  the  Mysteries ; 
but,  for  the  history  of  the  time,  all  are  of  the  highest  importance. 

The  orations  are  printed  in  the  collections  of  the  Greek  orators  mentioned  at  the  end 
of  the  article  on  Antiphon.  The  best  separate  editions  are  those  of  Schiller,  Leipzig,  1835, 
8vo,  and  of  Baiter  and  Sauppe,  Zurich,  1838,  8vo.  The  most  important  works  on  the 
life  and  orations  of  Andocides  are :  Sluiter,  Lectiones  Andocideoe,  Leyden,  1804,  reprinted 
at  Leipzig,  1834,  with  notes  by  Schiller ;  a  treatise  of  A.  G.  Becker,  prefixed  to  his  Ger 
man  translation  of  Andocides,  Quedlinburg,  1832,  8vo  ;  Ruhnken,  Hist.  Crit.  Orat.  Grate., 
p.  47,  seqq.  ;  Westermann,  Gesch.  der  Griech.  Beredtsamkeit,  t)  42,  seq. 

3.  LYSIAS  (Avtrtas)  was  born  at  Athens  in  B.C.  458.  He  was  the  son 
of  Cephalus,  who  was  a  native  of  Syracuse,  and  had  taken  up  his  abode 
at  Athens  on  the  invitation  of  Pericles.4  When  he  was  little  more  than 
fifteen  years  old,  in  B.C.  443,  Lysias  and  his  two  (some  say  three)  broth 
ers  joined  the  Athenians  who  went  as  colonists  to  Thurii,  in  Italy.  He 

i  DeMyst.,  $  146,  $  148.  2  Ib.,  t)  100.  3  Ib.,  t>  144. 

4  Dionys.,  Lys.,  1  ;  Plut.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  835. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  273 

there  completed  his  education  under  the  instruction  of  two  Syracusans, 
Tisias  (already  mentioned  by  us)  and  Nicias,  and  afterward  enjoyed  great 
esteem  among  the  Thurians,  and  even  seems  to  have  taken  part  in  the 
administration  of  the  young  republic.  From  a  passage  of  Aristotle,1  we 
learn  that  he  devoted  some  time  to  the  teaching  of  rhetoric,  though  it  is 
uncertain  whether  he  entered  upon  this  profession  while  yet  at  Thurii, 
or  did  not  commence  till  after  his  return  to  Athens,  where  we  know  that 
Isaeus  was  one  of  his  pupils.3  In  B.C.  411,  when  he  had  attained  the  age 
of  forty-seven,  after  the  defeat  of  the  Athenians  in  Sicily,  all  persons, 
both  in  Sicily  and  in  the  south  of  Italy,  who  were  suspected  of  favoring 
the  cause  of  the  Athenians,  were  exposed  to  persecutions  ;  and,  accord 
ingly,  Lysias,  together  with  300  others,  was  expelled  by  the  Spartan  party 
from  Thurii  as  a  partisan  of  the  Athenians.  He  now  returned  to  Athens ; 
but  there,  too,  great  misfortunes  awaited  him  ;  for,  during  the  rule  of  the 
Thirty  tyrants,  after  the  battle  of  ..Egospotami,  he  was  looked  upon  as  an 
enemy  of  the  government,  his  large  property  was  confiscated,  and  he  was 
thrown  into  prison  with  a  view  to  being  put  to  death.  But  he  escaped  from 
Athens,  and  took  refuge  at  Megara.3  His  attachment  to  Athens,  how 
ever,  was  so  great,  that  when  Thrasybulus,  at  the  head  of  the  patriots, 
marched  from  Phyle  to  liberate  their  country,  Lysias  joyfully  sacrificed 
all  that  yet  remained  of  his  fortune,  for  he  sent  the  patriots  2000  drachmas 
ana  200  shields,  and  engaged  a  band  of  302  mercenaries.  Thrasybulus 
procured  him  the  Athenian  franchise  as  a  reward  for  his  generosity  ;  but 
Archinus  afterward  induced  the  people  to  declare  it  void,  because  it  had 
been  conferred  without  a  probouleuma ;  and  Lysias  henceforth  lived  at 
Athens  as  an  isoteles,  occupying  himself,  as  it  appears,  solely  with  writing 
judicial  speeches  for  others,  and  died  in  B.C.  378,  at  the  age  of  eighty.* 

Lysias  was  one  of  the  most  fertile  writers  of  orations  that  Athens  ever 
produced,  for  there  were  in  antiquity  no  less  than  425  orations  which 
were  current  under  his  name,  though  the  ancient  critics  were  of  opinion 
that  only  230  of  them  were  genuine.5  Of  these  orations  only  thirty-five 
are  extant,  and  even  among  these  some  are  incomplete,  and  others  are 
probably  spurious.  Of  fifty-three  others  we  possess  only  a  few  fragments. 
Most  of  these  orations,  only  one  of  which  (that  against  Eratosthenes,  B.C. 
403)  he  delivered  himself  in  court,  were  composed  after  his  return  from 
Thurii  to  Athens.  There  are,  however,  some  among  them  which  prob 
ably  belong  to  an  earlier  period  of  his  life,  when  Lysias  treated  his  art 
more  from  a  theoretical  point  of  view,  and  they  must  therefore  be  regard 
ed  as  rhetorical  exercises.  But  from  the  commencement  of  the  speech 
against  Eratosthenes,  we  must  conclude  that  his  real  career  as  a  writer 
of  orations  began  about  B.C.  403.  Among  the  lost  works  of  Lysias  we 
may  mention  a  manual  of  rhetoric  (r4xvn  faropiich),  probably  one  of  his 
early  productions,  which,  however,  is  lost. 

How  highly  the  orations  of  Lysias  were  valued  in  antiquity  may  be  in 
ferred  from  the  great  number  of  persons  that  wrote  commentaries  upon 
them.  All  the  works,  however,  of  these  critics  have  perished.  The  only 

1  Ap.  Cic.  Brut.,  12.         2  piut^  j.  c. ;  p^ot.,  Cod.,  p.  490,  A.         3  Pint.,  Phot.,  II.  cc. 
*  Dionys.,  Lys.,  12 ;  Plut.,  p.  836.  «  Dionys.,  Lys.,  17  ;  Pint.,  p.  836. 


274  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

criticism  of  any  importance  upon  Lysias  that  has  come  down  to  us  is  that 
of  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus,  in  his  Uep]  T&V  apxaiwv  pr]r6p(i)v  UTTO^VTJ^O- 
ria-fj.oi,  the  TWV  apxaiiDi/  Kpicris,  and  in  his  account  of  Lysias  ;  to  which  we 
may  add  the  remarks  of  Photius.  According  to  the  judgment  of  Dionys 
ius,  and  the  accidental  remarks  of  others,  which  are  borne  out  by  a  care 
ful  examination  of  the  orations  still  extant,  the  diction  of  Lysias  is  per 
fectly  pure,  and  may  be  looked  upon  as  the  best  canon  of  the  Attic  idiom. 
His  language  is  natural  and  simple,  but,  at  the  same  time,  noble  and  dig 
nified  51  it  is  always  clear  and  lucid ;  the  copiousness  of  his  style  does 
not  injure  its  precision,  nor  can  his  rhetorical  embellishments  be  consid 
ered  as  impairing  the  charming  simplicity  of  his  manner  of  expression.51 
His  delineations  of  character  are  always  striking  and  true  to  life.  But 
what  characterizes  his  orations  above  those  of  all  other  ancients,  is  the 
indescribable  gracefulness  and  elegance  which  pervade  all  of  them,  with 
out  in  the  least  impairing  their  power  and  energy  ;  and  this  gracefulness 
was  considered  so  peculiar  a  feature  in  all  the  productions  of  Lysias,  that 
Dionysius  thought  it  a  fit  criterion  by  which  the  genuine  works  of  this 
orator  might  be  distinguished  from  the  spurious  productions  which  wrent 
by  his  name.3  The  manner  in  which  Lysias  treats  his  subjects  is  equally 
deserving  of  high  praise.  It  is  therefore  no  matter  of  surprise  to  hear 
that,  among  the  many  orations  he  wrote  for  others,  two  only  are  said  to 
have  been  unsuccessful.4 

The  extant  orations  of  Lysias  are  contained  in  the  collections  of  the  Greek  orators 
mentioned  at  the  close  of  the  article  on  Antiphon.  Among  the  separate  editions  we  may 
mention  those  of  Taylor,  London,  1739,  4to,  with  a  full  critical  apparatus,  and  the  em 
endations  of  Markland  ;  of  Auger,  Paris,  1783,  4to,  and  8vo,  2  vols. ;  of  Bremi,  in  Jacobs' 
and  Host's  Biblioth.  Gr<zc.,  Gotha,  1826  ("  Lysias  ct  Mschinis  Orationes  Selccta") ;  of 
Baiter  and  Sauppe,  Zurich,  1838;  of  Foertsch,  Leipzig,  1829;  of  Franz,  Munich,  1831  ; 
and  the  Select  Orations  of  Rauchenstein,  in  Haupt  and  Sauppe's  Collection,  Leipzig,  1850. 
The  following  modern  works  in  relation  to  Lysias  deserve  also  to  be  mentioned  here  : 
Franz,  Dissertatio  de  Lysia  Oratore  Attico  Grace  scripta,  Nurimb.,  1828,  8vo  ;  Hoelscher, 
De  LysiaB  oratoris  vita  et  dictio?ie,  Berlin,  1836,  8vo ;  and  Westermann,  Gesch.  der  Griech. 
Beredtsamkeit,  1)  46,  seqq. ;  Beilage,  iii.,  p.  278,  seqq. 

4.  ISOCRATES  ('lo-ofcpaTTjs)5  was  born  at  Athens  in  B.C.  436.  His  father, 
Theodorus,  was  a  man  of  considerable  wealth,  and  had  a  manufactory  of 
flutes  or  musical  instruments,  for  which  the  son  was  often  ridiculed  by 
the  comic  poets  of  the  time  ;  but  the  father  made  a  good  use  of  his  prop 
erty,  in  procuring  for  the  young  Isocrates  the  best  education  that  could 
be  obtained.  The  most  celebrated  sophists  are  mentioned  among  his 
teachers,  such  as  Tisias,  Gorgias,  and  Prodicus.6  Socrates  also  is  named 
among  his  instructors.  Isocrates  was  naturally  timid,  and  of  a  weakly 
constitution,  for  which  reasons  he  abstained  from  taking  any  direct  part 
in  the  political  affairs  of  his  country,  and  resolved  to  contribute  toward 
the  development  of  eloquence  by  teaching  and  writing,  and  thus  to  guide 
others  in  the  path  for  which  his  own  constitution  unfitted  him.  Accord 
ing,  however,  to  some  accounts,  he  devoted  himself  to  the  teaching  of 

i  Dionys.,  Lys.,  2,  3  ;  Cic.,  Brut.,  82  ;  Quintil,  xii.,  10,  21.        2  Dionys.,  Lys.,  4,  seqq. 
3  Id.  ib.,  10,  seqq.  *  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  836.  5  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

6  Dionys.,  Isocrat.,  1 ;  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  836. 


ATTIC     PERIOD. 


275 


rhetoric  for  the  purpose  of  ameliorating  his  circumstances,  since  he  had 
lost  his  paternal  inheritance  in  the  war  against  the  Lacedaemonians.1 

Isocrates  first  established  a  school  of  rhetoric  in  the  island  of  Chios, 
but  his  success  does  not  appear  to  have  been  very  great,  for  he  is  said  to 
have  had  only  nine  pupils  there.  He  is  stated,  however,  to  have  exerted 
himself  in  another  direction,  and  to  have  regulated  the  political  constitu 
tion  of  Chios  after  the  model  of  that  of  Athens.  After  this  he  returned 
to  Athens,  and  there  opened  a  school  of  rhetoric.  He  met  now  with  the 
greatest  success,  and  the  number  of  his  pupils  soon  increased  to  100,  ev 
ery  one  of  whom  paid  him  1000  drachmas.  In  addition  to  this  he  realized 
a  large  income  by  writing  orations.  Thus  Plutarch2  relates  that  Nico- 
cles,  king  of  Cyprus,  gave  Isocrates  twenty  talents  for  the  oration  irpbs 
Nf/co/cAea.  The  orations  of  Isocrates  were  either  sent  thus  to  the  per 
sons  to  whom  they  were  addressed,  for  their  private  perusal,  or  they  were 
intrusted  to  others  to  deliver  in  public.  He  is  said  to  have  delivered  only 
one  himself.  In  this  manner  he  gradually  acquired  a  considerable  prop 
erty,  and  he  was  several  times  called  upon  to  undertake  the  expensive 
trierarchy.  This  happened  first  in  B.C.  355,  but,  being  ill,  he  excused  him 
self  through  his  son  Aphareus.  In  B.C.  352  he  was  called  upon  again, 
and,  in  order  to  silence  the  calumnies  of  his  enemies,  he  performed  it  in 
the  most  splendid  manner.  The  oration  irepl  avTt$6<reus  irpbs  Avai^axov 
refers  to  that  event,  though  it  was  written  after  it.  This  is  said  by  Plu 
tarch  to  have  been  the  only  oration  that  he  ever  delivered. 

Isocrates  has  the  great  merit  of  being  the  first  who  clearly  saw  the 
great  value  and  objects  of  oratory  in  its  practical  application  to  public 
life  and  the  affairs  of  the  state.  At  the  same  time,  he  endeavored  to 
base  public  oratory  upon  sound  moral  principles,  and  thus  to  rescue  it 
from  the  influence  of  the  Sophists,  who  used  and  abused  it  for  any  and 
every  purpose ;  for  Isocrates,  although  educated  by  the  most  eminent 
sophists,  was  the  avowed  enemy  of  all  sophistry.  He  was,  however,  not 
altogether  free  from  their  influence ;  and  what  is  most  conspicuous  in 
his  political  discourses  is  the  absence  of  all  practical  knowledge  of  real 
political  life,  so  that  his  fine  theories,  though  they  were  unquestionably 
well  meant,  bear  a  strong  resemblance  to  the  visions  of  an  enthusiast. 
The  influence  which  he  exercised  on  his  country  by  his  oratory  must 
have  been  limited,  since  his  exertions  were  confined  to  his  school,  but 
through  his  school  he  had  the  greatest  possible  influence  upon  the  devel 
opment  of  public  oratory ;  for  the  most  eminent  statesmen,  philosophers, 
orators,  and  historians  of  the  time  were  trained  in  it,  and  afterward  de 
veloped,  each  in  his  particular  way,  the  principles  they  had  imbibed  there 
in.  No  ancient  rhetorician  had  so  many  disciples  that  afterward  shed 
lustre  on  their  country  as  Isocrates.  Hence  Cicero3  beautifully  compares 
his  school  to  the  Trojan  horse,  from  which  so  many  leaders  (principes) 
came  forth. 

The  great  esteem  in  which  the  orations  of  Isocrates  were  held  by  the 
ancient  grammarians  is  attested  by  the  numerous  commentaries  that 
were  written  upon  them.  All  these  commentaries,  however,  are  now 

'   Pint.,  I  c.,  p.  837  ;  Isocrat.,  De  Permut.,  6  172.       '  f.c.,p.838.       a  I)e  Orat.,  ii.,  22, 


276  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

lost,  with  the  exception  of  the  criticism  by  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus. 
The  language  of  Isocrates  is  the  most  refined  Attic,  and  thus  forms  a 
great  contrast  to  the  pure  and  natural  simplicity  of  Lysias,  as  well  as  the 
sublime  power  of  Demosthenes.  His  artificial  style  is  more  elegant  than 
graceful,  and  more  ostentatious  than  pleasing  ;  the  carefully-rounded  pe 
riods,  the  frequent  application  of  figurative  expressions,  are  features 
which  remind  us  of  the  Sophists  ;  and  although  his  sentences  flow  very 
melodiously,  yet  they  become  wearisome  and  monotonous  by  the  perpet 
ual  recurrence  of  the  same  over-refined  periods,  which  are  not  relieved 
by  being  interspersed  with  shorter  and  easier  sentences.  In  saying  this, 
however,  we  must  remember  that  Isocrates  wrote  his  orations  to  be  read, 
and  not  with  a  view  to  their  recitation  before  the  public.  The  immense 
care  which  he  bestowed  on  the  composition  of  his  orations,  and  the  time 
he  spent  in  working  them  out  and  polishing  them,  may  be  inferred  from 
the  statement  that  he  was  engaged  for  a  period  often,  and,  according  to 
others,  of  fifteen  years,  upon  his  Panegyric  oration.1  It  is  owing  to  this 
very  care  and  labor  that,  in  the  arrangement  and  treatment  cf  his  subject, 
Isocrates  is  far  superior  to  Lysias  and  other  orators  of  the  time,  and  that 
the  number  of  orations  which  he  wrote  is  comparatively  small. 

The  politics  of  Isocrates  were  conciliatory.  He  was  a  friend  of  peace : 
he  repeatedly  exhorted  the  Greeks  to  concord  among  themselves,  and  to 
turn  their  arms  against  their  common  enemy,  the  Persians.  He  ad 
dressed  Philip  of  Macedon  in  a  similar  strain  after  his  peace  with  Athens, 
B.C.  346,  exhorting  him  to  reconcile  the  states  of  Greece,  and  to  unite 
them  against  Persia.  Though  no  violent  partisan,  he  proved,  however, 
a  warm-hearted  patriot ;  for,  on  receiving  the  news  of  the  battle  of  Chse- 
ronea,  he  refused  to  take  food  for  several  days,  and  thus  closed  his  long 
and  honorable  career  at  the  age  of  ninety-eight,  B.C.  338. 

There  were  in  antiquity  sixty  orations  which  went  by  the  name  of 
Isocrates,  but  Csecilius,  a  rhetorician  of  the  time  of  Augustus,  recognized 
only  twenty-eight  of  them  as  genuine,2  and  of  these  only  twenty-one  have 
come  down  to  us.  Eight  of  them  were  written  for  judicial  purposes  in 
civil  cases,  and  intended  to  serve  as  models  for  this  species  of  oratory. 
All  the  others  are  political  discourses,  or  show-speeches,  intended  to  be 
read  by  a  large  public  ;  they  are  particularly  characterized  by  the  ethical 
element,  on  which  his  political  views  are  based.  Of  these,  the  most  re 
markable  is  the  discourse  entitled  TIa.vr)yvptK6s,  Panegyricus,  or  "  Pane 
gyrical  Oration,"  that  is,  a  discourse  intended  to  be  pronounced  before 
the  assembled  people.  It  was  published  (though  not  with  a  view  of  be 
ing  delivered)  about  B.C.  379,  in  the  time  of  the  Lacedeemonian  ascend 
ency,  and  in  it  he  exhorts  the  Lacedaemonians  and  Athenians  to  vie  with 
each  other  in  a  noble  emulation,  and  to  unite  their  forces  in  an  expedi 
tion  against  Asia.  He  descants  eloquently  on  the  merits  and  glories  of 
the  Athenian  commonwealth,  on  the  services  it  had  rendered  to  Greece, 
and  on  its  high  intellectual  cultivation ;  wThile  he  defends  it  from  the 
charges,  urged  by  its  enemies,  of  tyranny  by  sea,  and  of  oppression  to 
ward  its  colonies.  In  the  'Apfoirayin^s,  Areopagiticus,  one  of  the  best 
,  x.,  4,  4.  =  Plut.,  1.  c.,  p.  838  ;  Phot.,  Cod.,  26<X 


ATTIC     PERIUD.  211 

of  his  discourses,  he  declares  that  he  sees  no  safety  for  Athens  save  in 
the  restoration  of  that  democracy  which  Solon  had  founded,  and  Clisthe- 
nes  had  revived. 

Besides  these  entire  orations,  we  have  the  titles  and  fragments  of 
twenty-seven  other  orations,  which  are  referred  to  under  the  name  of 
Isocrates.  There  also  exist  under  his  name  ten  letters,  which  were 
written  to  friends  on  political  questions  of  the  time ;  one  of  them,  how 
ever  (the  tenth),  is  in  all  probability  spurious.  A  scientific  manual  of 
rhetoric  (Texvtj  faropiicf)),  which  Isocrates  wrote,  is  lost,  with  the  excep 
tion  of  a  few  fragments,  so  that  we  are  unable  to  form  any  definite  idea 
of  his  merits  in  this  respect. 

The  orations  of  Isocrates  are  printed  in  the  various  collections  of  the  Greek  orators 
already  mentioned  at  the  close  of  the  article  on  Antiphon.  Of  the  separate  editions  we 
may  mention  those  of  H.  Wolf,  Basle,  1553,  8vo,  and  with  Wolf's  notes  and  emenda 
tions,  Basle,  1570,  fol. ;  of  Auger,  Paris,  1782,  3  vols.  8vo,  which  is  not  what  it  might 
have  been,  considering  the  MSS.  he  had  at  his  disposal ;  of  Lange,  Halle,  1803,  8vo  ;  of 
Coraes,  Paris,  1807,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  of  Baiter  and  Sauppe,  Zurich,  1839,  8vo  ;  and  of  Baiter, 
in  Didot:s  BMiotheca  Grceca,  Paris,  1846,  8vo.  There  are  also  many  good  editions  either 
of  the  orations  separately,  or  else  of  particular  orations,  among  which  we  may  name 
the  Select  Orations,  by  Bremi,  Gotha,  1831,  part  i. ;  the  Panegyricus,  with  the  notes  of 
Morus,  by  Spohn,  Leipzig,  1817,  2d  edition  by  Baiter,  Lips.,  1831 ;  by  Pinzger,  Leipzig, 
1825,  and  by  Dindorf,  1826  ;  the  Areopagiticus,  by  Benseler,  Leipzig,  1832  ;  the  Panegyr- 
icus  and  Areopagiticus,  by  Rauchenstein,  Leipzig,  1849,  8vo,  forming  part  of  Haupt  and 
Sauppe's  collection  ;  the  Euagorce  Encomium,  by  Leloup,  Mayence,  1828  ;  and  the  oration 
Trepl  di'TiSoo-ew?,  by  Orelli,  Zurich,  1814. 

A  useful  Index  Grcecitatis  was  published  by  Mitchell,  Oxford,  1827,  8vo.  The  follow 
ing  works  will  also  be  found  worthy  of  attention :  Westermann,  Gesch.  der  Griech.  Be- 
redtsamkeit,  §  48,  seq. ;  Beilage,  iv.,  p.  288,  seqq. ;  Leloup,  Commentatio  tie  Isocrate,  Bonn, 
1823,  8vo  ;  and  Pfund,  De  Isocratis  Vita  et  Scriptis,  Berlin,  1833. 

5.  IsyErs  ('la-aios')  was  a  native  of  Chalcis,  or,  as  some  say,  of  Athens, 
probably  only  because  he  came  to  the  latter  city  at  an  early  age,  and 
spent  the  greater  part  of  his  life  there.  The  time  of  his  birth  and  death 
is  unknown,  but  all  accounts  agree  in  the  statement  that  he  flourished 
(^Kjuafre)  during  the  period  between  the  Peloponnesian  war  and  the  acces 
sion  of  Philip  of  Macedonia,  so  that  he  lived  between  B.C.  420  and  348.1 
He  was  instructed  in  oratory  by  Lysias  and  Isocrates.2  He  was  after 
ward  engaged  in  writing  judicial  orations  for  others,  and  established  a 
rhetorical  school  at  Athens,  in  which  Demosthenes  is  said  to  have  been 
one  of  his  pupils.  Suidas  states  that  Isseus  instructed  him  gratis,  whereas 
Plutarch  relates  that  he  received  10,000  drachmas  ;3  and  it  is  further 
said  that  Iseeus  wrote  for  Demosthenes  the  speeches  against  his  guard 
ians,  or,  at  least,  assisted  him  in  the  composition.  All  particulars  about 
his  life  are  unknown,  and  were  so  even  in  the  time  of  Dionysius,  since 
Hermippus,  who  had  written  an  account  of  the  disciples  of  Isocrates,  did 
not  mention  ISEBUS  at  all. 

In  antiquity  there  were  sixty-four  orations  which  bore  the  name  of 
Isaeus,  but  fifty  only  were  recognized  as  genuine  by  the  ancient  critics.4 
Of  these  only  eleven  have  come  down  to  us  ;  but  we  possess  fragments 
and  the  titles  of  fifty-six  speeches  ascribed  to  him.  The  eleven  extant  are 

1  Dionys.,  ISOBUS,  1  ;  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  839.  2  Phot.,  Cod.,  263. 

'J  Plut.,  De  Glor.  Ath.,  p.  350,  C.  4  Id.,  Vit.  Dec.  Oral.,  I.  c. 


278  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

all  on  subjects  connected  with  disputed  inheritances  ;  and  Isaeus  appears 
to  have  been  particularly  well  acquainted  with  the  laws  relating  to  inher 
itance  (irepl  K\-r\pov).  Ten  of  these  orations  have  been  known  ever  since 
the  revival  of  letters,  and  were  printed  in  the  collections  of  the  Greek 
orators  ;  but  the  eleventh,  ?repl  TOV  Mei/e/cAeous  wA^pou,  was  first  published 
from  a  Florentine  MS.,  by  Tyrwhitt,  London,  1785,  8vo  ;  and  afterward 
in  the  Gotting.  Biblioth.  fur  alte  Lit.  und  Kunst,  for  1788,  part  iii.,  and  by 
Orelli,  Zurich,  1814,  8vo.  In  1815,  Mai  discovered  the  greater  part  of 
the  oration  of  Isseus,  irepi  TOV  KAewi/u/iou  K\^pov,  which  he  published  at  Mi 
lan,  1815,  fol.,  and  reprinted  in  his  Classic.  Auctor.  e  Cod.  Vatican.,  vol.  iv., 
p.  280,  seqq. 

Isaeus  wrote  also  on  rhetorical  subjects,  such  as  a  work  entitled  ISiai 
rexvai.  which,  however,  is  lost.1  Though  his  orations  were  placed  in  the 
Alexandrean  canon,  still  we  do  not  hear  of  any  of  the  grammarians  hav 
ing  written  commentaries  upon  them  except  Didymus.  But  we  still  pos 
sess  the  criticism  upon  Iseeus  written  by  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus  ; 
and,  by  a  comparison  of  the  orations  still  extant  with  the  opinions  of  Di 
onysius,  we  come  to  the  following  conclusion.  The  oratory  of  Isseus  re 
sembles  in  many  points  that  of  his  teacher  Lysias  ;  the  style  of  both  is 
pure,  clear,  and  concise.  But  while  Lysias  is,  at  the  same  time,  simple 
and  graceful,  Isasus  evidently  strives  to  attain  a  higher  degree  of  polish 
and  refinement,  without,  however,  in  the  least  injuring  the  powerful  and 
impressive  character  of  his  oratory.  The  same  spirit  is  visible  in  the 
manner  in  which  he  handles  his  subjects,  especially  in  their  skillful  divi 
sion,  and  in  the  artful  manner  in  which  he  interweaves  his  arguments 
with  various  parts  of  the  exposition,  whereby  his  orations  become  like  a 
painting  in  which  light  and  shade  are  distributed  with  a  distinct  view  to 
produce  certain  effects.  It  was  mainly  owing  to  this  mode  of  manage 
ment  that  he  was  envied  and  censured  by  his  contemporaries,  as  if  he 
had  tried  to  deceive  and  mislead  his  hearers.  He  was  one  of  the  first 
who  turned  their  attention  to  a  scientific  cultivation  of  political  oratory  ; 
but  excellence  in  this  department  of  the  art  was  not  attained  till  the  time 
of  Demosthenes.2 

The  orations  of  Isaeus  are  contained  in  the  collections  of  the  Greek  orators  mentioned 
at  the  close  of  the  article  on  Antiphon.  A  separate  edition,  with  Reiske's  and  Taylor's 
notes,  appeared  at  Leipzig,  1773,  8vo,  and  another  by  SchSfer,  Leipzig,  1822,  8vo.  The 
best  separate  edition,  however,  is  that  by  Schomann,  Greifswald,  1831,  8vo,  with  critical 
notes  and  a  good  commentary.  There  is  an  English  translation  of  the  orations  of  Isae 
us  by  Sir  William  Jones,  London,  1794,  4to,  with  prefatory  discourse,  notes  critical  and 
historical,  and  a  commentary.  This  translation  will  give  an  English  reader  a  sufficient 
notion  of  the  orator,  but  it  is  somewhat  deficient  in  critical  accuracy,  and  also  wanting 
in  force.  For  farther  information  concerning  Isaeus,  the  student  may  consult  Wester- 
mann,  Gesch.  der  Griech.  Beredts.,  t)  51,  Beilage,  v.,  p.  293,  seqq.,  and  Liebmann,  Ue  Isai 
Vita  et  Scriptis,  Halle,  1831,  4to. 


6.  ^ESCHINES  (AiVx^s)3  was  the  son  of  Atrometus  and  Glaucothea, 

and  was  born  B.C.  389.     According  to  Demosthenes,  his  political  antag 

onist,  and  who  was  no  doubt  in  this  guilty  of  exaggeration,  his  parents 

were  of  disreputable  character,  and  not  even  citizens  of  Athens.     JEs- 

1  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  (hat.,  I  c  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Id.  ib. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  279 

chines  himself,  on  the  other  hand,  says  that  his  father  was  descended 
from  an  honorable  family,  and  lost  his  property  during  the  Peloponnesian 
war.  ^Eschines  had  two  brothers,  one  of  whom,  Philochares,  was  older 
than  himself,  and  the  other,  Aphobetus,  was  the  youngest  of  the  three. 
Philochares  was  at  one  time  one  of  the  ten  Athenian  generals,  an  office 
which  was  conferred  upon  him  for  three  successive  years  ;  Aphobetus 
followed  the  calling  of  a  scribe,  but  had  once  been  sent  on  an  embassy  to 
the  King  of  Persia,  and  was  afterward  connected  with  the  administration 
of  the  public  revenue  of  Athens.1  All  these  things  seem  to  contain  strong 
evidence  that  the  family  of  JEschines,  though  poor,  must  have  been  of 
some  respectability. 

In  his  youth  ^Eschines  appears  to  have  assisted  his  father,  who  kept  a 
small  school ;  he  next  acted  as  secretary  to  Antiphon,  and  afterward  to 
Eubulus,  a  man  of  great  influence  with  the  democratical  party,  with  whom 
he  formed  an  intimate  friendship,  and  to  whose  political  principles  he  re 
mained  faithful  to  the  end  of  his  life.  After  leaving  the  service  of  Eubu 
lus,  he  tried  his  fortune  as  an  actor,  for  which  he  was  provided  by  nature 
with  a  strong  and  sonorous  voice.  He  acted  the  parts  of  a  rpirayoivKn-ris, 
but  was  unsuccessful,  and,  on  one  occasion,  when  he  was  performing  in 
the  character  of  CEnomaus,  he  was  hissed  off  the  stage.2  After  this  he 
left  the  stage  and  engaged  in  military  services,  in  which,  according  to  his 
own  account,3  he  gained  great  distinction.4  After  sharing  in  several  less 
important  engagements  in  other  parts  of  Greece,  he  distinguished  himself, 
in  B.C.  362,  in  the  battle  of  Mantinea.  Subsequently,  in  B.C.  358,  he  also 
took  part  in  the  expedition  of  the  Athenians  against  Eubcea,  and  fought  in 
the  battle  of  Tamynae,  and  on  this  occasion  he  gained  such  laurels  that  he 
was  praised  by  the  generals  on  the  spot,  and,  after  the  victory  was  gained, 
was  sent  to  carry  the  news  of  it  to  Athens.  The  Athenians  honored  him 
with  a  crown.  Two  years  before  this  campaign,  the  last  in  which  he 
took  part,  ^Eschines  had  come  forward  at  Athens  as  a  public  speaker,5  and 
the  military  fame  which  he  had  now  acquired  established  his  reputation. 
His  former  occupation  as  a  scribe  to  Antiphon  and  Eubulus  had  made  him 
acquainted  with  the  laws  and  constitution  of  Athens,  while  his  acting  on 
the  stage  had  been  a  useful  preparation  for  public  speaking. 

During  the  first  period  of  his  public  career,  ^schines  was,  like  all  other 
Athenians,  zealously  engaged  in  directing  the  attention  of  his  fellow-cit 
izens  to  the  growing  power  of  Philip,  and  exhorted  them  to  check  it  in 
its  growth.  In  B.C.  347,  he  was  sent,  along  with  Demosthenes,  as  one 
of  the  ten  ambassadors  to  negotiate  a  peace  with  Philip.  From  this  time 
he  appears  as  the  friend  of  the  Macedonian  party,  and  as  the  opponent  of 
Demosthenes.  Shortly  afterward,  he  formed  one  of  the  second  embassy 
sent  to  Philip  to  receive  that  monarch's  oath  to  the  treaty  which  had  been 
concluded  with  the  Athenians ;  but,  as  the  delay  of  the  ambassadors  in 
obtaining  the  ratification  had  been  favorable  to  the  interests  of  Philip, 
^Eschines,  on  his  return  to  Athens,  was  accused  by  Timarchus.  He 
evaded  the  danger,  however,  by  bringing  forward  a  counter-accusation 

1  JEsch.,  Defals.  Leg.,  p.  48.        2  Dem.,  De  Coron.,  p.  288.        3  Defals.  Leg.,?.  50. 
*  Compare  Demosth.,  Defals.  Leg.,  p.  375.  5  JZsch.,  Epist.,  12. 


280  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

against  Timarchus,  and  by  showing  that  the  moral  character  of  his  ac 
cuser  was  such  that  he  had  no  right  to  speak  before  the  people.  The 
speech  in  which  yEschines  attacked  Timarchus  is  still  extant.  Timarchus 
was  condemned,  and  J3schines  gained  a  brilliant  triumph.  As  we  know 
little  more  of  the  matter  than  what  is  contained  in  the  two  speeches  of 
^Eschines  and  his  accuser,  as  they  have  come  down  to  us,  we  have  not 
the  means  of  forming  a  proper  judgment  of  the  innocence  or  guilt  ofJEs- 
chines.  His  simple,  clear,  and  persuasive  statement,  however,  of  his 
own  case  proves  his  great  abilities  ;  and,  contrasted  with  the  somewhat 
confused  speech  of  his  accuser,  leaves  a  favorable  impression  of  the  jus 
tice  of  his  defence. 

^Eschines  and  Demosthenes  at  length  were  at  the  head  of  the  two  par 
ties,  into  which  not  only  Athens,  but  all  Greece,  was  divided,  and  their 
political  enmity  created  and  nourished  personal  hatred.  This  enmity 
came  to  a  head  in  B.C.  343,  when  Demosthenes  charged  ^Eschines  with 
having  been  bribed,  and  having  betrayed  the  interests  of  his  country  dur 
ing  the  second  embassy  to  Philip.  This  charge  of  Demosthenes  (-n-epl  ira- 
pairpeo-ptias)  was  not  spoken,  but  published  as  a  memorial,  and  ^Eschines 
answered  it  in  a  similar  memorial  on  the  embassy,  which  was  likewise 
published,  and  in  the  composition  of  which  he  is  said  to  have  been  assist 
ed  by  his  friend  Eubulus.1  The  result  of  these  mutual  attacks  is  un 
known,  but  there  is  no  doubt  that  a  severe  shock  was  given  to  the  popu 
larity  of  ^Eschines.  At  the  time  he  wrote  his  memorial  we  gain  a  glimpse 
into  his  private  life.  Some  years  before  that  occurrence  he  had  married 
a  daughter  of  Philodemus,  a  man  of  high  respectability  in  his  tribe  of  Pae- 
ania,  and  in  B.C.  343  he  was  father  of  three  little  children.2 

The  last  great  event  in  the  public  life  of  ^Eschines  was  his  prosecution 
of  Ctesiphon.  It  seems  that  after  the  battle  of  Chaeronea,  in  B.C.  338,  the 
enemies  of  Demosthenes  made  the  misfortune  of  that  day  a  handle  for 
attacking  him ;  but,  notwithstanding  the  bribes  which  ^Eschines  had  re 
ceived  from  Antipater  for  this  purpose,  the  pure  and  unstained  patriotism 
of  Demosthenes  was  so  generally  recognized,  that  he  received  the  honor 
able  charge  of  delivering  the  funeral  oration  over  those  who  had  fallen  at 
Chaeronea.  Acting  upon  this  same  idea,  therefore,  Ctesiphon  proposed 
that  Demosthenes  should  be  rewarded  for  the  services  he  had  done  to  his 
country  with  a  golden  crown  in  the  theatre,  at  the  great  Dionysia.  ^Es- 
chines  availed  himself  of  the  illegal  form  in  which  this  reward  was  pro 
posed  to  be  given  to  bring  a  charge  against  Ctesiphon  on  that  ground. 
But  he  did  not  prosecute  the  matter  till  eight  years  later,  that  is,  in  B.C. 
330,  when,  after  the  death  of  Philip,  and  the  victories  of  Alexander,  po 
litical  affairs  had  assumed  a  different  aspect  in  Greece.  After  having 
commenced  the  prosecution  against  Ctesiphon,  he  is  said  to  have  gone 
for  some  time  to  Macedonia.  What  induced  him  to  drop  the  prosecution 
of  Ctesiphon,  and  to  take  it  up  again  eight  years  afterward,  are  questions 
which  can  only  be  answered  by  conjectures.  The  speech  in  which  he 
accused  Ctesiphon  in  B.C.  330,  and  which  is  still  extant,  is  so  skillfully 
managed,  that,  if  he  had  succeeded,  he  would  have  totally  destroyed  all 

1  Demosth.,  Defals.  Leg.,  p.  337.  2  JEsch.,  De  fals.  Leg.,  p.  52. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  281 

the  political  influence  and  authority  of  Demosthenes.  The  latter  answer 
ed  JEschines  in  his  celebrated  oration  "  on  the  crown"  (irepl  o-r^dvov). 
^Eschines  lost  his  cause,  and  not  having  obtained  one  fifth  part  of  the 
votes  of  the  judges,  he  was  compelled  to  leave  Athens,  being  unable  to 
pay  the  penalty  in  that  case  required  by  the  law. 

JSschines  went  to  Asia  Minor.  The  statement  of  Plutarch  that  De 
mosthenes  provided  him  with  the  means  of  accomplishing  his  journey  is 
surely  a  fable.  He  spent  several  years  in  Ionia  and  Caria,  occupying 
himself  with  teaching  rhetoric,  and  anxiously  waiting  for  the  return  of 
Alexander  to  Europe.  When,  in  B.C.  324,  the  report  of  the  death  of 
Alexander  reached  him,  he  left  Asia  and  went  to  Rhodes,  where  he  es 
tablished  a  school  of  eloquence,  which  subsequently  became  very  celebra 
ted,  and  occupies  a  middle  position  between  the  grave  manliness  of  the 
Attic  orators  and  the  effeminate  luxuriance  of  the  so-called  Asiatic  school 
of  eloquence.  On  one  occasion,  he  read  to  his  audience  in  Rhodes  his- 
speech  against  Ctesiphon,  and  when  some  of  his  hearers  expressed  their 
astonishment  at  his  having  been  defeated,  notwithstanding  his  brilliant 
oration,  he  replied,  "  You  would  not  have  been  surprised  if  you  had  heard 
Demosthenes/'  The  anecdote  is  told  somewhat  differently  by  Cicero,1 
and  in  a  manner  better  suited  to  the  purpose  to  which  he  applies  it. 

The  conduct  of^Eschines  has  been  censured  by  the  writers  of  all  ages, 
and  for  this  many  reasons  may  be  mentioned.  In  the  first  place,  and 
above  all,  it  was  his  misfortune  to  be  constantly  brought  into  juxtaposi 
tion  or  opposition  to  the  spotless  glory  of  Demosthenes,  and  this  must 
have  made  him  appear  more  guilty  in  the  eyes  of  those  who  saw  through 
his  actions,  while  in  later  times  the  contrast  between  the  greatest  orators 
of  the  day  was  frequently  made  the  theme  of  rhetorical  declamation,  in 
which  one  of  the  two  was  praised  or  blamed  at  the  cost  of  the  other,  and 
less  with  regard  to  truth  than  to  effect.  Respecting  the  last  period  of 
his  life  we  scarcely  possess  any  other  source  of  information  than  the  ac 
counts  of  late  sophists,  and  declamations.  Another  point  to  be  considered, 
in  forming  a  just  estimate  of  the  character  of  ^Eschines,  is,  that  he  had 
no  advantages  of  education,  and  that  he  owed  his  greatness  to  no  one 
but  himself.  His  occupations  during  the  early  part  of  his  life  were  such 
as  necessarily  engendered  in  him  the  low  desire  of  gain  and  wealth  ;  and 
had  he  overcome  these  passions,  he  would  perhaps  have  been  nearly 
equal  to  Demosthenes.  No  ancient  writer  except  Demosthenes  charges 
him  with  having  received  bribes  from  the  Macedonians  for  the  purpose 
of  betraying  his  country ;  still,  however,  coming  as  it  does  from  so  true 
a  patriot,  the  charge  can  hardly  have  been  an  unfounded  one,  though 
perhaps  in  some  degree  exaggerated  by  the  violence  of  party.  It  is  im 
possible  to  arrive  at  the  complete  truth  from  the  perplexing  history  of  a 
period  when  the  principal  authorities  are  two  political  rivals,  whose  state 
ments  about  the  same  matter  are  often  in  direct  contradiction  to  one  an 
other.2 

But  if  the  integrity  of  ^Eschines  is  suspected,  his  great  abilities  both 
as  a  popular  leader  and  an  orator  are  undisputed.  He  was  the  rival,  and, 

i  De  Oral.,  Hi.,  56.     Compare  Plin.,  H.  N.,  vii.,  30  ;  QuintiL,  xi.,  3,  6,        2  Smith,  /.c. 


2S2 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


in  the  judgment  of  Cicero  and  Quintilian,  all  but  the  equal  of  Demosthe 
nes.  In  the  lucid  arrangement  of  his  matter,  in  the  ease  and  clearness 
of  his  narrative,  he  has  never  been  surpassed ;  if  he  falls  below  Demo 
sthenes  in  any  quality  of  an  orator,  it  is  in  powerful  invective  and  vehe 
ment  passion.  The  facility  and  felicity  of  his  diction,  the  boldness  and 
the  vigor  of  his  descriptions,  carry  away  the  reader  now,  as  they  must 
have  carried  away  his  audience  in  former  times. 

yEschines  published  only  three  of  his  numerous  orations,  namely,  the 
one  against  Timarchus,  that  on  the  embassy,  and  the  oration  against 
Ctesiphon.  The  ancients,  as  Photius  remarks,  designated  these  three 
orations  as  the  Graces.  Photius  mentions  also  nine  letters  of  ./Eschines, 
which  the  ancients  in  like  manner  called  the  Muses.  At  present,  besides 
the  three  orations,  we  possess  twelve  letters  ascribed  to  ^Eschines,  which, 
however,  in  all  probability,  are  not  more  genuine  than  the  so-called  epis 
tles  of  Phalaris,  and  are  undoubtedly  the  work  of  late  sophists. 

The  orations  and  letters  are  given  in  all  the  collections  of  the  Greek  orators  men 
tioned  at  the  end  of  the  article  on  Antiphon.  Of  separate  editions  we  may  mention  the 
following:  that  by  Wolf,  Basle,  1572,  fol. ;  by  Taylor,  Cambridge,  1748-57,  3  vols.  4to ; 
by  Schafer,  Leipzig,  1817,  8vo ;  by  Bremi,  Zurich,  1823-4,  2  vols.  8vo ;  by  W.  Dindorf, 
Leipzig,  1824,  8vo  ;  by  Bremi,  LysitB  et  JEschinis  Orationes  Sclectae,  in  Jacobs'  and  Host's 
Bibliotheca  Grceca,  Gotha,  1826,  8vo ;  by  Baiter  and  Sauppe,  Zurich,  1840,  16mo  ;  by 
Wunderlich  (the  oration  against  Ctesiphon),  Gottingen,  1810,  8vo ;  by  Franke  (the  ora 
tion  against  Timarchus),  Cassel,  1839,  8vo. 

7.  LYCURGUS  (AvKovpyos),  namesake  of  the  celebrated  Spartan  lawgiver, 
was  born  at  Athens  about  B.C.  396,  and  was  the  son  of  Lycophron,  who 
belonged  to  the  noble  family  of  the  Eteobutadse.1  In  early  life  he  de 
voted  himself  to  the  study  of  philosophy  in  the  school  of  Plato,  but  aft 
erward  became  one  of  the  disciples  of  Isoerates,  and  entered  upon  public 
life  at  a  comparatively  early  age.  He  was  appointed  three  successive 
times  to  the  office  of  rap-ias  rris  Koivys  Trpos6dov,  or  manager  of  the  public 
revenue,  and  held  his  office  each  time  for  five  years,  beginning  with  B.C. 
337.  The  conscientiousness  with  which  he  discharged  the  duties  of  this 
station  enabled  him  to  raise  the  public  revenue  to  the  sum  of  1200  tal 
ents  This,  as  well  as  the  unwearied  activity  with  which  he  labored, 
for  increasing  both  the  security  and  splendor  of  the  city  of  Athens,  gained 
for  him  the  universal  confidence  of  the  people  to  such  a  degree,  that 
when  Alexander  the  Great  demanded,  among  the  other  opponents  of  the 
Macedonian  interest,  the  surrender  of  Lycurgus  also,  who  had,  in  con 
junction  with  Demosthenes,  exerted  himself  against  the  intrigues  of 
Macedonia  even  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Philip,  the  people  of  Athens 
clung  to  him,  and  boldly  refused  to  deliver  him  up.2  He  was  farther  in 
trusted  with  the  superintendence  ((pv\aK-f))  of  the  city,  and  the  keeping  of 
public  discipline  ;  and  the  severity  with  which  he  watched  over  the  con 
duct  of  the  citizens  became  almost  proverbial.3 

Lycurgus  had  a  noble  taste  for  every  thing  that  was  beautiful  and 
grand,  as  he  showed  by  the  buildings  he  erected  or  completed,  both  for 
the  use  of  the  citizens  and  the  ornament  of  the  city.  His  integrity  was 

1  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Oral.,  p.  841.  2  Phot.,  Cod.,  268,  p.  496,  seqq. 

3  Cic.  ad  Att.,  i.,  13 ;  Pint.,  Flamin.,  12. 


ATTIC     PERIOD. 


283 


so  great  that  even  private  persons  deposited  with  him  large  sums  of 
money,  which  they  wished  to  be  kept  in  safety.  He  was  also  the  author 
of  several  legislative  enactments,  of  which  he  enforced  the  strictest  ob 
servance.  One  of  his  laws  forbade  women  to  ride  in  chariots  at  the  cel 
ebration  of  the  mysteries  ;  and  when  his  own  wife  transgressed  this  law 
she  was  fined.1  Another  ordained  that  bronze  statues  should  be  erected 
to  ^Eschylus,  Sophocles,  and  Euripides,  and  that  copies  of  their  tragedies 
should  be  made  and  preserved  in  the  public  archives.  The  lives  of  the 
ten  orators  ascribed  to  Plutarch2  are  full  of  anecdotes  and  characteristic 
features  of  Lycurgus,  from  which  we  must  infer  that  he  was  one  of  the 
noblest  specimens  of  old  Attic  virtue,  and  a  worthy  contemporary  of  De 
mosthenes.  He  often  appeared  as  a  successful  accuser  in  the  Athenian 
courts,  but  he  himself  was  as  often  accused  by  others,  though  he  always, 
and  even  in  the  last  days  of  his  life,  succeeded  in  silencing  his  enemies. 
He  died  while  holding  the  office  of  eVto-Tar^s  of  the  theatre  of  Bacchus, 
in  B.C.  323.  A  fragment  of  an  inscription  containing  an  account  which 
he  rendered  to  the  state  of  his  administration  of  the  finances  is  still  ex 
tant.  According  to  Bockh,  Lycurgus  was  the  only  statesman  of  antiqui 
ty  who  had  a  real  knowledge  of  the  management  of  finance.  At  his 
death  he  left  behind  him  three  sons.  Among  the  honors  paid  his  memory 
it  may  be  mentioned  that  he  received  a  public  funeral,  and  that  a  bronze 
statue  was  subsequently  erected  to  him  in  the  Ceramicus. 

Plutarch3  and  Photius*  mention  fifteen  orations  of  Lycurgus  as  extant, 
but  we  know  the  titles  of  at  least  twenty.8  With  the  exception,  how 
ever,  of  one  entire  oration  against  Leocrates,  and  some  fragments  of 
others,  all  the  rest  are  lost,  so  that  our  knowledge  of  his  skill  and  style 
as  an  orator  is  very  incomplete.  Dionysius  and  other  ancient  critics 
draw  particular  attention  to  the  ethical  tendency  of  his  orations,  but  they 
censure  the  harshness  of  his  metaphors,  the  inaccuracy  in  the  arrange 
ment  of  his  subject,  and  his  frequent  digressions.  His  style  is  noble  and 
grand,  but  neither  elegant  nor  pleasing.6  The  extant  oration  (Kara  Aea>- 
Kparovs)  is  an  accusation  of  Leocrates,  an  Athenian  citizen,  for  abandon 
ing  Athens  after  the  battle  of  Chaeroriea,  and  settling  in  another  Grecian 
state.  It  was  delivered  in  B.C.  330. 

The  oration  against  Leocrates  is  printed  in  the  various  collections  of  the  Attic  orators 
mentioned  at  the  close  of  the  article  on  Antiphon.  Among  the  separate  editions  the  fol 
lowing  are  most  worthy  of  notice  :  that  of  Taylor,  CambridgeVl~43,  8vo,  printed  togeth 
er  with  the  speech  of  Demosthenes  against  Midias  ;  of  Heinrich,  Bonn,  1821,  8vo;  of 
Pinzger,  Leipzig,  1824,  8vo,  with  a  learned  introduction,  notes,  and  a  German  transla 
tion  ;  of  Becker,  Magdeburg,  1821,  8vo  ;  of  Baiter  and  Sauppe,  Zurich,  1834,  8vo  ;  and  of 
Matzner,  Berlin,  1836,  8vo.  The  fragments  of  the  other  orations  are  collected  by  Kiess- 
ling,  Lycurgi  Dcperd.  Orat.  Fragmenta,  Halle,  1847.  The  following  works  may  be  con 
sulted  in  relation  to  Lycurgus  :  Blume,  Narratio  de  Lycurgo  Oratore,  Potsdam,  1834,  4to  ; 
Nissen,  De  Lycurgi  Oratoris  vita  et  rebus  gestis  dissertatio,  Kiel,  1833,  8vo. 


8.  DEMOSTHENES  (AT^ocrfle'j/Tjs),  the  greatest  of  the  Greek  orators,  was 
the  son  of  Demosthenes,  and  born  in  the  Attic  demus  of  Paeania.     His 

1  Milan,  V.  If.,  xiii.,  24.  2  p.  842.  seqq.  3  Piut^  L  c>)  p  843 

4  Phot.,  1.  c.,  p.  406,  U.        s  Westermann,  Gcsch.  <l.  Gricch.  Bcrcdts.,  Beilage,  vi.,  p.  290. 
6  Dionys.,  Vet.  Script.  o«,y.,  v.,  3. 


284 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


birth-year,  according  to  the  most  commonly  received  opinion,  was  B.C. 
385,  His  father  carried  on  the  trade  of  sword-manufacturer  (paxaipoTrotds) ; 
his  mother  was  Cleobule,  the  daughter  of  Gylon.  This  Gylon,  who  had 
been  governor  of  Nymphaeum,  an  Athenian  settlement  in  the  Tauric  Cher- 
sonesus,  betrayed  it  to  the  Scythians,  and,  afterward  taking  refuge  with 
their  chief,  married  a  Scythian  woman,  who  was  the  maternal  grand 
mother  of  Demosthenes.  This  impurity  of  blood  and  the  misconduct  of 
Gylon,  his  maternal  grandfather,  formed  a  theme  for  the  taunts  of  ^Es- 
chines.  There  is  a  well-known  allusion  in  Juvenal1  to  the  trade  of  De 
mosthenes  the  elder,  and  hence  the  opinion  so  commonly  entertained  that 
the  father  of  the  orator  was  a  blacksmith.  The  point  of  the  satirist,  how 
ever,  is  somewhat  if  not  altogether  lost,  \vhen  wre  remember  that  Plu 
tarch2  applies  to  the  father  a  term  (/caAo/ca7a0<k)  which  expresses  all  that 
can  be  said  to  the  advantage  of  a  man,  and  also  that  he  had  two  manu 
factories  (tpyaa-T-ripia),  containing,  on  the  whole,  more  than  fifty  slaves. 

Demosthenes  the  elder  died  when  his  son  was  seven  years  old,  leaving 
him  and  a  sister,  younger  than  himself,  to  the  care  of  three  guardians, 
Aphobus  and  Demophon,  his  first  cousins,  and  Therippides,  a  friend.  The 
property  left  by  him  amounted  to  fifteen  talents.  The  guardians,  how 
ever,  as  we  learn  from  Demosthenes  himself,  disregarded  all  his  father's 
injunctions,  and,  while  they  neglected  to  improve  the  property  of  which 
they  were  trustees,  embezzled  nearly  the  whole  of  it.  Plutarch3  states 
that  they  also  deprived  Demosthenes  of  proper  masters.  He  himself, 
however,  in  a  passage  where  it  is  his  object  to  magnify  all  that  concerns 
his  own  history,  boasts  of  the  fitting  education  which  he  had  received. 
He  is  said  to  have  been  instructed  in  philosophy  by  Plato  ;4  but  it  is  very 
doubtful  whether  this  statement  be  correct.  It  may  be  that  Demosthenes 
knew  and  esteemed  Plato,  but  this  probably  is  all,  and  to  make  him,  as 
some  critics  have  done,  a  perfect  Platonist,  is  certainly  going  too  far. 
According  to  some  accounts,  moreover,  he  was  instructed  in  oratory  by 
Isocrates  ;5  but  this  was  a  disputed  point  with  the  ancients  themselves, 
some  of  whom  stated  that  he  was  not  personally  instructed  by  Isocrates, 
but  only  that  he  studied  the  rexv-n  faropiKr)  which  Isocrates  had  written.6 
To  this  may  be  added,  that  Demosthenes  himself  speaks  with  contempt 
of  the  rhetorical  school  of  Isocrates.7  The  account  that  Demosthenes 
was  instructed  in  oratory  by  Isasus8  has  much  more  probability ;  for  at 
that  time  Isaeus  was  the  most  eminent  orator  in  matters  connected  with 
the  lawrs  of  inheritance,  the  very  thing  that  Demosthenes  needed.  This 
account  is  farther  supported  by  the  fact  that  the  earliest  orations  of  De 
mosthenes,  namely,  those  against  Aphobus  and  Onetor,  bear  so  strong  a 
resemblance  to  those  of  Isaeus,  that  the  ancients  themselves  believed  them 
to  have  been  composed  by  Isaeus  for  Demosthenes,  or  that  the  latter  had 
written  them  under  the  guidance  of  the  former.9 


i  Sat.,  x.,  130.  2  Plut.,  Dem.,  4.  3  Phit.,  I.  c. 

4  Plut.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  844  ;  Dem.,  5.  5  Plut.,  I.  c. 

6  Plut.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  837  ;  Dem.,  5.  7  Dem.  c.  Lacrin.,  p.  928,  937. 

8  Plut.,  Dem.,  5  ;  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  844. 

9  Plut.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  839  ;  Liban.,  Vit.  '  DCJII.,  3. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  285 

At  the  age  of  eighteen,  the  termination  of  his  minority,  Demosthenes 
called  upon  his  guardians  to  render  him  an  account  of  their  administra 
tion  of  his  property,  but  by  intrigues  they  contrived  to  defer  the  business 
for  two  years.  At  length,  in  B.C.  364,  Demosthenes  accused  Aphobus 
before  the  archon,  and  obtained  a  verdict  in  his  favor.1  Aphobus  was 
condemned  to  pay  ten  talents,  Demosthenes  having  estimated  his  losses 
at  thirty  talents  (inclusive  of  ten  years'  interest),  and  having  sued  him  for 
one  third  part.  He  did  not,  however,  succeed  in  obtaining  more  than  a 
small  part  of  the  sum  thus  awarded  to  him.  This  took  place,  as  already- 
intimated,  when  Demosthenes  was  in  his  twentieth  year,  or,  as  he  says 
of  himself,  when  he  was  quite  a  boy  ;  but  the  extant  orations  against  his 
guardians  are  evidently  not  the  work  of  a  youth  of  that  age,  and,  as  we 
have  before  remarked,  were  either  composed  by  Isaeus  or  under  his  di 
rection.  Emboldened  by  his  success,  Demosthenes  ventured  to  come  for 
ward  as  a  speaker  in  the  public  assembly.  His  first  effort,  however,  was 
a  failure,  and  he  encountered  the  ridicule  of  his  hearers  ;  but  he  was  en 
couraged  to  persevere  by  the  actor  Satyrus,  who  gave  him  instruction  in 
action  and  declamation  ;  and  his  efforts  were  finally  crowned  with  the 
most  brilliant  success. 

The  physical  disadvantages  under  which  Demosthenes  labored  are  well 
known,  and  the  manner  in  which  he  surmounted  them  is  often  quoted  as 
an  example  to  encourage  others  to  persevere.  It  should  be  observed, 
however,  that  the  authority  for  some  of  these  stories  is  but  small,  and 
that  they  rest  on  the  assertions  of  writers  of  late  date.  He  was  naturally 
of  a  weak  constitution  ;  he  had  a  feeble  voice,  an  indistinct  articulation, 
and  a  shortness  of  breath.  From  his  defective  utterance,  his  inability  to 
pronounce  the  letter  p,  and  his  constant  stammering,  he  derived,  in  fact, 
the  nickname  of  ^drraXos  (or  pdraXos),  the  delicate  youth  or  stammerer. 
It  was  only  owing  to  the  most  unwearied  and  persevering  exertions  that 
he  succeeded  in  overcoming  and  removing  the  obstacles  which  nature  had 
thus  placed  in  his  way ;  and  yet  the  means  which  he  is  said  to  have  taken 
to  remedy  these  defects  look  very  like  the  inventions  of  some  writer  of 
the  rhetorical  school,  though  Plutarch  quotes  Demetrius  Phalereus  as  say 
ing  that  he  had  from  the  orator's  own  lips  that  the  account  was  correct. 
Among  these  means  we  hear  of  his  speaking  with  pebbles  in  his  mouth, 
in  order  to  cure  himself  of  stammering  ;  of  repeating  verses  of  the  poets 
as  he  ran  up  hill,  in  order  to  strengthen  his  voice  ;  of  declaiming  on 
the  sea-shore,  to  accustom  himself  to  the  noise  and  confusion  of  the 
popular  assembly ;  of  his  living  for  months  in  a  cave  under  ground,  en 
gaged  in  constantly  writing  out  the  orations  contained  in  the  history  of 
Thucydides,  in  order  to  form  a  standard  for  his  own  style.  And  yet, 
though  these  tales  are  not  worthy  of  much  credit,  they,  nevertheless,  at 
test  the  common  tradition  of  antiquity  respecting  the  great  efforts  made 
by  Demosthenes  to  attain  to  excellence  as  an  orator. 

It  was  about  B.C.  355  that  Demosthenes  began  to  obtain  reputation  as 
a  speaker  in  the  public  assembly.     It  was  in  this  year  that  he  delivered 
the  oration  against  Leptines,  and  from  this  time  we  have  a  series  of 
1  Dem.  c.  Aphob.,  i.,  p.  828. 


286  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

his  speeches  on  public  affairs.  His  eloquence  soon  gained  him  the  favor 
of  the  people  ;  and  the  influence  which  he  acquired  he  employed  for  the 
good  of  his  country,  and  not  for  his  own  aggrandizement.  He  clearly  saw 
that  Philip  had  resolved  to  subjugate  Greece,  and  he  therefore  devoted  all 
his  powers  to  resist  the  aggressions  of  the  Macedonian  monarch.  For 
fourteen  years  he  continued  the  struggle  against  Philip,  and  neither 
threats  nor  bribes  could  turn  him  from  his  purpose.  It  is  true  he  failed  ; 
but  the  failure  must  not  be  regarded  as  his  fault.  The  struggle  was 
brought  to  a  close  by  the  battle  of  Chseronea,  which  crushed  the  inde 
pendence  of  Greece.  Demosthenes  was  present  in  the  conflict,  and  fled 
like  thousands  of  others.  His  enemies  reproached  him  with  his  flight, 
and  upbraided  him  as  the  cause  of  the  misfortunes  of  his  country ;  but 
the  Athenians  judged  better  of  his  conduct,  requested  him  to  deliver  the 
funeral  oration  upon  those  who  had  fallen  at  Chaeronea,  and  even  cele 
brated  the  funeral  feast  in  his  house.  At  this  time  many  accusations 
were  brought  against  him  by  the  adherents  of  the  Macedonian  party,  one 
of  the  most  formidable  of  which  was  the  attack  made  by  ^Eschines  upon 
Ctesiphon,  but  which  was  in  reality  aimed  at  Demosthenes  himself.  The 
nature  and  the  issue  of  this  prosecution  have  already  been  mentioned  in 
the  article  on  ^Eschines. 

M^ntime  important  events  had  taken  place  in  Greece.  The  death  of 
Philip,  in  B.C.  336,  roused  the  hopes  of  the  patriots,  and  Demosthenes, 
though  he  had  lost  his  daughter  only  seven  days  before,  was  the  first  to 
proclaim  the  joyful  tidings  of  the  king's  death,  and  to  call  upon  the  Greeks 
to  unite  their  strength  against  Macedonia.  But  Alexander's  energy,  and 
the  frightful  vengeance  which  he  took  upon  Thebes,  compelled  Athens  to 
submit  and  sue  for  peace.  Alexander  demanded  the  surrender  of  De 
mosthenes  and  the  other  leaders  of  the  popular  party,  and  with  difficulty 
allowed  them  to  remain  at  Athens.  During  the  life  of  Alexander,  Athens 
made  no  open  attempt  to  throw  off  the  Macedonian  supremacy.  But  in 
B.C.  325,  Harpalus  having  fled  from  Babylon  with  the  treasure  intrusted 
to  his  care  by  Alexander,  came  to  Athens,  the  protection  of  which  he 
purchased  by  distributing  his  gold  among  the  most  influential  demagogues. 
The  reception  of  such  an  open  rebel  was  viewed  as  an  act  of  hostility 
against  Macedonia  itself;  and  accordingly  Antipater  called  upon  the 
Athenians  to  deliver  up  the  offender,  and  to  bring  to  trial  those  who  had 
accepted  his  bribes.  Demosthenes  was  one  of  those  who  were  suspected 
of  having  received  money  from  Harpalus.  The  accounts  of  his  conduct 
during  the  presence  of  Harpalus  at  Athens  are  so  confused  that  it  is  al 
most  impossible  to  arrive  at  any  certain  conclusion  respecting  his  guilt 
or  his  innocence.  Theopompus,1  and  Dinarchus,  in  his  oration  against 
Demosthenes,  state  that  he  did  accept  the  bribes  of  Harpalus ;  but  Pau- 
sanias3  expressly  acquits  him  of  the  crime.  The  authority  of  his  accusers, 
however,  is  very  questionable ;  for,  in  the  first  place,  they  do  not  agree 
in  the  detail  of  their  statements,  and,  secondly,  if  we  consider  the  con 
duct  of  Demosthenes  throughout  the  disputes  about  Harpalus,  if  we  re 
member  that  he  opposed  the  reception  of  the  rebel,  and  that  he  volun- 

1  Theopomp.  ap.  Pint.,  Dem.,  25.    Compare  Vit .  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  846.      2  Pausan.,  ii.,  33, 4. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  287 

tarily  offered  himself  to  be  tried,  we  must  own  that  it  is,  at  least,  highly 
improbable  that  he  should  have  been  guilty  of  common  bribery,  and  that 
it  was  not  his  guilt  which  caused  his  condemnation,  but  the  implacable 
hatred  of  the  Macedonian  party,  which  eagerly  seized  this  favorable  op 
portunity  to  rid  itself  of  its  most  formidable  opponent,  who  was  at  that 
time  abandoned  by  his  friends  from  sheer  timidity. 

Demosthenes  was  declared  guilty,  and  thrown  into  prison,  from  which, 
however,  he  escaped,  apparently  with  the  connivance  of  the  Athenian 
magistrates.1  Having  quitted  his  country,  he  resided  partly  at  Trcezene 
and  partly  in  ^Egina,  looking  daily,  it  is  said,  across  the  sea  toward  his 
beloved  native  land.  But  his  exile  did  not  last  long.  On  the  death  of 
Alexander,  in  B.C.  323,  the  Greek  states  rose  in  arms  against  Macedonia, 
Demosthenes  was  recalled  from  exile,  a  trireme  was  sent  to  ^Egina  to 
convey  him  to  his  native  land,  and  his  progress  to  the  city  was  a  glorious 
triumph.2  It  was  a  triumph,  however,  of  short  duration.  In  the  follow 
ing  year,  B.C.  322,  the  confederate  Greeks  were  defeated  by  Antipater  at 
the  battle  of  Cranon,  and  were  compelled  to  sue  for  peace.  Antipater 
demanded  the  surrender  of  Demosthenes,  who  thereupon  fled  to  the  isl 
and  of  Calauria,  in  the  Saronic  Gulf,  off  the  coast  of  Argolis,  and  took 
refuge  in  the  temple  of  Neptune.  Here  he  was  pursued  by  the  emissa 
ries  of  Antipater  ;  he  thereupon  took  poison,  which  he  had  for  some  *ime 
carried  about  his  person,  and  died  in  the  temple,  B.C.  322. 

Thus  terminated  the  career  of  a  man  who  has  been  ranked  by  persons 
of  all  ages  among  the  greatest  and  noblest  spirits  of  antiquity.  And  this 
fame  will  remain  undiminished  so  long  as  sterling  sentiments  and  prin 
ciples,  and  a  consistent  conduct  through  life,  are  regarded  as  the  stand 
ard  by  which  a  man's  worth  is  measured,  and  not  simply  the  success 
— so  often  merely  dependent  upon  circumstances — by  which  his  exer 
tions  are  crowned.  The  very  calumnies  which  have  been  heaped  upon 
Demosthenes  by  his  enemies  and  detractors,  more  extravagantly  than 
upon  any  other  man,  have  only  served  to  bring  forth  his  political  virtues 
in  a  more  striking  and  brilliant  light.  Some  points  there  are  in  his  life 
which  perhaps  will  never  be  quite  cleared  up,  on  account  of  the  distort 
ed  statements  which  have  come  down  to  us  respecting  them.  Some 
minor  charges  which  are  m  de  against  him,  and  affect  his  character  as  a 
man,  are  almost  below  contempt.  It  is  said,  for  example,  that  he  took 
to  flight  after  the  battle  of  Chaeronea,  as  if  thousands  of  others  had  not 
fled  with  him  ;3  that,  notwithstanding  his  domestic  calamity  (his  daugh 
ter  had  died  seven  days  before),  he  rejoiced  at  Philip's  death,  which 
shows  only  the  predominance  of  his  patriotic  feelings  over  his  personal 
and  selfish  ones  ;*  and,  lastly,  that  he  shed  tears  on  going  into  exile,  a  fact 
for  which  he  deserves  to  be  loved  and  honored  rather  than  blamed.  In 
his  administration  of  public  affairs  Demosthenes  is  perfectly  spotless,  and 
free  from  all  the  crimes  which  the  men  of  the  Macedonian  party  commit 
ted  openly  and  without  any  disguise.  The  charge  of  bribery,  which  was 
so  often  raised  against  him  by  JEschines,  must  be  rejected  altogether,  and 

1  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Oral.,  p.  846.  2  Pint.,  Dem.,  27 ;  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  846. 

3  Plut.,  Dem.,  20 ;  Vit.  Dec.  (Trat.,  p.  845.      *  Pint.,  Dem.,  22 ;  IRsch.  c.  Ctes.,  t)  77, 


288  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

is  a  mere  distortion  of  the  fact  that  Demosthenes  accepted  subsidies  from 
Persia  for  Athens,  which  assuredly  stood  in  need  of  such  aid  in  its  strug 
gles  with  Macedonia ;  but  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  a  suspicion  that  he 
ever  accepted  any  personal  bribes.1 

His  career  as  a  statesman  received  its  greatest  lustre  from  his  powers 
as  an  orator,  in  which  he  has  not  been  equalled  by  any  man  of  any  coun 
try.  Our  own  judgment  on  this  point  would  necessarily  be  one-sided,  as 
we  can  only  read  his  orations  ;  but  among  the  contemporaries  of  Demo 
sthenes  there  was  scarcely  one  who  could  point  out  any  definite  fault  in 
his  oratory.  By  far  the  greater  part  looked  up  to  him  as  the  greatest 
orator  of  his  time,  and  it  was  only  men  of  such  over-refined  and  hyper 
critical  tastes  as  Demetrius  Phalereus  who  thought  him  either  too  plain 
and  simple  or  too  harsh  and  strong.2  These  peculiarities,  however,  are 
far  from  being  faults ;  they  are,  on  the  contrary,  proofs  of  his  genius,  if 
we  consider  the  temptations  which  natural  deficiencies  hold  out  to  an 
orator  to  pursue  the  opposite  course.  The  obstacles  which  his  physical 
constitution  threw  in  his  way  when  he  commenced  his  career  were  so 
great,  that  a  less  courageous  and  persevering  man  than  Demosthenes 
would  at  once  have  been  intimidated,  and  entirely  shrunk  from  the  ardu 
ous  career  of  a  public  orator.  Those  early  difficulties  with  which  he  had 
to  contend  led  him  to  bestow  more  care  upon  the  composition  of  his  ora 
tions  than  he  would  otherwise  have  done,  and  produced  in  the  end,  if  not 
the  impossibility  of  speaking  extempore,  at  least  the  habit  of  never  ven 
turing  upon  it ;  for  he  never  spoke  without  preparation,  and  he  sometimes 
€ven  declined  speaking  when  called  upon  in  the  assembly  to  do  so,  merely 
because  he  was  not  prepared  for  it.  There  is,  however,  no  reason  for 
believing  that  all  the  extant  orations  were  delivered  in  that  perfect  form 
in  which  they  have  come  down  to  us,  for  most  of  them  were  probably 
subjected  to  a  careful  revision  before  publication  ;  and  it  is  only  the  ora 
tion  against  Midias,  which,  having  been  written  for  the  purpose  of  being 
delivered,  and  being  afterward  given  up  and  left  incomplete,  may  be  re 
garded  with  certainty  as  a  specimen  of  an  oration  in  its  original  form. 
This  oration  alone  sufficiently  shows  how  little  Demosthenes  trusted  to 
the  impulse  of  the  moment.3 

The  first  cause  of  the  mighty  impression  which  his  speeches  made 
upon  the  minds  of  his  hearers  was  their  pure  and  ethical  character ;  for 
every  sentence  exhibits  Demosthenes  as  the  friend  of  his  country,  of  vir 
tue,  truth,  and  public  decency  ;4  and  as  the  struggles  in  which  he  was 
engaged  were  fair  and  just,  he  could  without  scruple  unmask  his  oppo 
nents,  and  wound  them  where  they  were  vulnerable,  though  he  never 
resorted  to  sycophantic  artifices.  The  second  cause  was  his  intellectual 
superiority.  By  a  wise  arrangement  of  his  subjects,  and  by  the  applica 
tion  of  the  strongest  arguments  in  their  proper  places,  he  brought  these 
subjects  before  his  hearers  in  the  clearest  possible  form ;  doubts  that 
might  be  raised  were  met  by  him  beforehand,  and  thus  he  proceeded 
calmly  but  irresistibly  toward  his  end.  The  third  and  last  cause  was  the 
magic  force  of  his  language,  which,  being  majestic  and  yet  simple,  rich, 

i  Smith,  I.e.  2  piut.,  Dem.  ,9,  11.  3  Smith,  I.  c.  *  Pint.,  Dem.,  13. 


A.TTH1      I'KUIOl). 

yet  not  bombastic,  strange  and  yet  familiar,  solemn  without  being  orna 
mented,  grave  and  yet  pleasing,  concise  and  yet  fluent,  sweet  and  yet 
impressive,  carried  away  the  minds  of  his  hearers.  That  such  orations 
should,  notwithstanding,  sometimes  have  failed  to  produce  the  desired  ef 
fect,  was  owing  only  to  the  spirit  of  the  times.1 

The  ancients2  state  that  there  existed  sixty-five  orations  of  Demosthe 
nes,  but  of  these  only  sixty-one,  and  if  we  deduct  the  letter  of  Philip, 
which  is,  strangely  enough,  counted  as  an  oration,  only  sixty  have  come 
down  to  us  under  his  name,  though  some  of  these  are  spurious,  or,  at 
least,  of  very  doubtful  authenticity.  Besides  these  orations  there  are 
fifty-six  exordia,  or  introductions  to  public  orations  (Upooi^a  8-ri/j.iiyopiKa), 
and  six  letters  which  bear  the  name  of  Demosthenes,  though  their  genu 
ineness  is  very  doubtful.  Confining  ourselves  to  the  classification  adopt 
ed  by  the  ancient  rhetoricians,  we  may  arrange  all  the  discourses  of  De 
mosthenes  under  one  of  three  heads  :  1.  Deliberative  discourses  (\6yoi  <TV/J.- 
povXevriKoi),  treating  of  political  topics,  and  delivered  before  the  Senate 
or  the  Assembly  of  the  People.  2.  Judicial  speeches  (\6yoi  Si/ccm/coi),  hav 
ing  for  their  object  accusation  or  defence.  3.  Studied  or  set  speeches, 
called  also  Show-speeches  (\6yoi  eViSet/cTi/coi),  intended  to  censure  or  praise. 
Seventeen  of  the  orations  of  Demosthenes  belong  to  the  first  of  these 
classes,  forty-two  to  the  second,  and  two  to  the  third. 

Of  the  deliberative  or  political  discourses,  the  twelve  Philippic  orations 
are  the  most  important,  and  relate  to  the  quarrels  between  the  state  and 
King  Philip,  and  also  to  the  other  political  movements  of  that  monarch 
for  the  increase  of  his  power.  In  the  common  arrangement,  four  of  these 
are  specially  termed  "Philippics,"  while  three  others  are  denominated 
"  Olynthiacs,"  the  object  of  the  former  being  to  urge  the  Athenians  to 
prosecute  the  war  vigorously  against  Philip,  and  of  the  Olynthiacs,  to 
stimulate  the  Athenians  to  succor  Olynthus,  and  prevent  its  falling  into 
the  hands  of  that  monarch.  The  twelve  Philippics  were  delivered  in  the 
following  order.  The  first  Philippic,  B.C.  352;  the  three  Olynthiacs,  also 
called  the  second,  third,  and  fourth  Philippics,  B.C.  349  ;  the  fifth  Philip 
pic  (which,  according  to  some  critics,  forms  part  of  the  first  in  our  pres 
ent  copies),  B.C.  347 ;  the  sixth  Philippic,  also  called  the  "  Oration  on  the 
Peace,"  B.C.  346  ;  the  seventh  Philippic  (according  to  the  common  ar 
rangement,  the  second),  B.C.  344;  the  eighth  Philippic,  also  called  the 
"  Oration  concerning  Halonesus,"  B.C.  343  ;  the  ninth  Philippic,  also  called 
the  "  Oration  on  the  Chersonesus,"  the  tenth  and  eleventh  Philippics  (ac 
cording  to  the  common  arrangement,  the  third  and  fourth),  all  in  B.C. 
342 ;  the  twelfth  Philippic,  also  called  the  "  Oration  against  the  Letter," 
B.C.  340.  This  last  is  a  spurious  oration,  and  so,  according  to  nearly  all 
critics,  is  the  eleventh,  which  many  make  to  belong,  not  to  B.C.  342,  but 
to  341.  The  oration  concerning  Halonesus,  also,  was  suspected  by  the 
ancients  themselves,  and  ascribed  to  Hegesippus.  Weiske  undertakes  to 
defend  it,  but  is  opposed  by  Becker  and  Vomel,  the  latter  of  whom  even 
published  a  separate  edition  of  it  under  the  name  of  Hegesippus  in  1833. 

Of  the  judicial  discourses,  the  most  important  are  the  oration  against 
1  Smith,  I.  c.  2  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  847  ;  Phot.,  p.  490. 

N 


290  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Midias,  written  B.C.  355,  but  never  delivered;  that  against  Leptines,  in 
the  same  year;  that  on  the  dishonest  conduct  of^Eschines  during  his 
embassy  to  Philip  ;  and  especially  that  on  the  Crown.  The  action  against 
Midias  was  for  personal  violence  offered  to  Demosthenes  during  the  cel 
ebration  of  the  great  Dionysia,  but  it  was  settled  before  trial,  on  Demo 
sthenes  receiving  from  Midias  the  sum  of  thirty  minse.  The  oration  against 
Leptines  charged  him  with  having  proposed  a  law  taking  away  all  special 
exemptions  from  the  burden  of  public  charges  (dreAejcu  T&V  \eiTovpyiuv). 
The  subjects  of  the  other  two  orations  have  already  been  referred  to. 

The  firiTatyios  \6yos  and  the  spwriK&s  are  the  two  show-speeches.  But 
they  are  both  unquestionably  spurious.  The  former  belongs  to  B.C.  338, 
and  is  an  eloge  on  those  who  fell  at  Chaeronea ;  the  latter  is  written  in 
praise  of  the  beauty  of  the  young  Epicrates. 

EDITIONS    OF    DEMOSTHENES. 

Most  of  the  critical  works  that  were  written  upon  Demosthenes  by  the  ancients  are 
lost,  and,  independent  merely  of  many  scattered  remarks,  the  only  important  critical 
work  that  has  come  down  to  us  is  that  of  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus,  entitled  irepl  rijs 
TOV  Ai7/uoo-0eVovs  SeivoTTj-ros.  The ,  acknowledged  excellence  of  Demosthenes'  orations 
made  them  the  principal  subjects  of  study  and  speculation  with  the  rhetoricians,  and 
called  forth  numerous  commentators  and  imitators.  It  is  probably  owing  to  these  rhe 
torical  speculations,  which  began  as  early  as  the  second  century  B.C.,  that  a  number 
of  orations,  which  are  decidedly  spurious  and  unworthy  of  him,  such  as  the  A.6yo?  eTj-t- 
roujuos  and  the  epwriKos,  were  incorporated  in  the  collections  of  those  of  Demosthenes. 
Others,  such  as  the  speech  on  Halonesus,  the  first  against  Aristogiton,  those  against 
Theocrines  and  Nesera,  which  are  undoubtedly  the  productions  of  contemporary  orators, 
may  have  been  introduced  among  those  of  Demosthenes  by  mistake.  It  would  be  of 
great  assistance  to  us  to  have  the  commentaries  which  were  written  upon  Demosthenes 
by  such  men  as  Didymus,  Longinus,  Hennogenes,  and  others ; but,  unfortunately,  most 
of  what  they  wrote  is  lost,  and  scarcely  any  thing  of  importance  is  extant,  except  the 
miserable  collection  of  scholia  which  have  come  down  to  us  under  the  name  of  Ulpian, 
and  the  Greek  argumenta  to  the  orations  by  Libanius  and  other  rhetoricians. 

The  orations  of  Demosthenes  are  contained  in  the  various, collections  of  the  Attic  ora 
tors  mentioned  in  the  account  of  the  editions  of  Antiphon.  Of  separate  editions  we  may 
mention  that  of  Wolf,  Basle,  1572  (often  reprinted)  ;  of  Auger,  Paris,  1790;  of  Schafer, 
'vith  a  copious  commentary,  Leipzig  and  London,  1822,  9  vols.  8vo,  the  first  two  con 
taining  the  text,  the  third  the  Latin  version,  and  the  others  the  critical  apparatus,  in 
dices,  &c.  A  thin  volume  containing  an  Index  verborum,  grammaticus,  &c.,  was  added 
by  Seller,  Leipzig,  1833.  A  good  edition  of  the  text  is  that  by  W.  Dindorf,  Leipzig,  1825, 
3  vols.  8vo,  2d  edition,  Leipzig,  1851  ;  and  with  a  revised  text  and  Latin  translation,  by 
Voemel,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  GraBca,  Paris,  1843.  But  the  most  elaborate  and  complete 
edition  is  the  one  recently  issued  from  the  Oxford  press,  edited  anew  by  W.  Dindorf, 
1847-52,  9  vols.  8vo,  the  first  four  volumes  containing  the  text,  the  fifth,  sixth,  and  sev 
enth  the  commentary,  and  the  eighth  and  ninth  the  scholia,  amended  and  enlarged  from 
MSS. 

The  orations  of  Demosthenes  have  often  been  edited  also  in  selections  or  separately. 
Of  these  the  most  valuable  for  text  or  commentary  are  as  follows  :  The  Philippics,  by 
Bekker,  Berlin,  1816,  1825,  and  1835  ;  by  Rudiger,  Leipzig,  1818, 1829,  and  1833  ;  by  Voe 
mel,  Frankfort,  1829 ;  and  by  Franke,  Leipzig,  1842,  2d  edition,  1850.  The  Olynthiacs,  by 
Frotscher  and  Funkhaenel,  Leipzig,  1834.  The  oration  De  Haloneso,  by  Voemel,  Frank 
fort,  1830.  De  Corona,  by  Bekker,  with  scholia,  Halle,  1815,  and  Berlin,  1825;  by  Har- 
less,  Leipzig,  1814  ;  with  other  select  orations,  by  Bremi,  in  2  parts,  Gotha,  1829-33,  2d 
edition,  by  Sauppe,  1845-51  ;  by  Dissen,  Gottingen,  1837.  The  oration  against  Leptines, 
best  edition  by  Wolf,  Halle,  1789,  re-edited  by  Bremi,  Zurich,  1839,  8vo.  The  oration 
against  Midias,  by  Buttmann,  Berlin,  1823,  1833,  and  1841 ;  by  Blume,  Sund.,  1828  ;  and 
by  Meier,  Halle,  1832.  The  oration  against  Androtion,  by  Funkhaenel,  Leipzig,  1832.  8vo. 
The  oration  against  Aristoerates,  by  Weber,  Jena.  1845. 


ATTIC     PERIOD. 

Besides  the  ancient  and  modern  historians  of  the  times  of  Philip  and  Alexander,  the 
following  works  will  be  found  useful  to  the  student  of  Demosthenes  ;  Schott,  Vitas  Par 
allels  Aristot.  etDemosth.,  Antwerp,  1603  ;  Becker,  Demosthenes  als  Staatsmann  und  Red- 
ner,  Halle,  181C,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  Westermann,  Quaestiones  Demosthenica,  in  four  parts,  Leip 
zig,  1830-37 ;  Geschichte  der  Griech.  Beredtsamkeit,  t>  56,  seq.,  and  Beilage,  vii.,  p.  297, 
seqq.;  Biihneke,  Studien  auf  dem  Gebiete  der  Attischen  Redner,  Berlin,  1843. 

9.  HYPERIDES  ('T7repei§7js  or  'TwepiS^s}  was  the  son  of  Glaucippus,  and 
belonged  to  the  Attic  demus  of  Collytus.  He  was  a  friend  of  Demosthe 
nes,  and  with  him  and  Lycurgus  he  was  at  the  head  of  the  anti-Macedo 
nian  party.  His  birth-year  is  unknown,  but  he  must  have  been  of  about 
the  same  age  as  Lycurgus,  who  was  born  in  B.C.  396. x  Throughout  his 
public  career  he  joined  the  patriots  with  the  utmost  determination  and 
with  his  whole  soul,  and  remained  faithful  to  them  to  the  last,  through 
all  the  dangers  and  catastrophes  by  which  Athens  was  weighed  down 
successively  under  Philip,  Alexander,  and  Antipater.  This  steadfast  ad 
herence  to  the  good  cause  may  have  been  owing,  in  a  great  measure,  to 
the  influence  which  Demosthenes  and  Lycurgus  exercised  over  him,  for 
he  seems  to  have  been  naturally  a  person  of  a  vacillating  character ;  and 
Plutarch  states  that  he  sometimes  gave  way  to  his  passions,  which  were 
not  always  of  the  noblest  kind.2  In  philosophy  he  was  a  pupil  of  Plato,3 
and  Isocrates  trained  and  developed  his  oratorical  talent.*  He  began  his 
career  by  conducting  lawsuits  of  others  in  the  courts  of  justice.5  Our 
information,  however,  respecting  his  life  is  very  meagre.  It  seems  that 
he  first  displayed  his  patriotic  feelings  in  B.C.  358  by  the  sacrifices  which 
he  made  for  the  public  good  during  the  expedition  against  Euboea,  for  on 
that  occasion  he  and  his  son  are  said  to  have  equipped  two  triremes  at 
their  own  expense.  After  the  death  of  Alexander  (B.C.  323),  Hyperides 
took  an  active  part  in  organizing  that  confederacy  of  the  Greeks  against 
Antipater  which  produced  the  Lamian  war.  Upon  the  defeat  of  the  con 
federates  at  the  battle  of  Cranon  in  the  following  year,  Hyperides  fled  to 
^Egina,  where  he  was  slain  by  the  emissaries  of  Antipater. 

Hyperides  must  have  appeared  before  the  public  on  many  occasions, 
both  in  the  courts  of  justice  and  in  the  assembly  of  the  people.  The 
number  of  orations  attributed  to  him  was  seventy-seven,  but  even  the 
ancient  critics  rejected  twenty-five  of  them  as  spurious.6  The  titles  of 
sixty-one  (for  more  are  not  known)  are  enumerated  by  Westermann.7 
The  most  important  among  them  appear  to  have  been  the  ATjAia/cds,  the 
(brn-a^tos,  and  the  orations  against  Aristogiton,  Demades,  and  Demosthe 
nes,  especially  the  last.  This  speech  was  the  one  which  he  delivered 
when  he  accused  Demosthenes  of  corruption  in  the  affair  of  Harpalus. 
Plutarch  states  that  Hyperides  was  found  to  have  been  the  only  man  who 
had  not  received  any  money  from  Harpalus,  and  it  may  therefore  be  that 
he  was  compelled  to  act  the  part  of  an  accuser,  or  he  may  have  hoped  to 
give  the  matter  a  more  favorable  turn  for  Demosthenes  by  coming  for 
ward  as  accuser.  Hyperides  and  Demosthenes,  however,  again,  at  a 

1  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  848,  D;  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  46.  2  Pint.,  I.  c.,  p.  849,  D. 

3  Diog.  Laert.,  1.  c.  *  Athen.,  viii.,  p.  342  ;  Phot.,  Cod.,  260,  p.  487. 

5  Pint.,  I.  c.,  p.  448,  E.  e  U_  #M  p.  849i  D. 

7  Gesch.  d.  Griech.  Beredts.,  p.  307,  seqq. 


292  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

subsequent  period,  stood  in  friendly  relations  to  each  other,  and  again 
united  against  the  common  foe. 

Until  the  year  1847,  we  may  be  said  to  have  had  no  one  of  the  orations 
of  Hyperides  remaining,  but  merely  a  considerable  number  of  fragments, 
few  of  them  of  any  length.  In  that  year,  however,  a  manuscript  of  the 
oration  against  Demosthenes  was  discovered  at  Thebes,  in  Egypt,  on  pa 
pyrus,  which,  though  it  did  not  give  the  entire  speech,  in  consequence  of 
its  mutilated  condition,  yet  afforded  fragments  of  so  great  length,  that  we 
may  almost  be  said  to  have  the  oration  entire.  Bockh  undertook  the  res 
titution  and  arrangement  of  these  fragments  in  1848,  in  the  Hallischer 
Liter aturzeitung,  and  afterward  in  a  separate  form.  A  similar  attempt 
was  made  by  Sauppe,  somewhat  later,  in  the  "  Philologus"  (vol.  iii.,  p. 
610,  seqq.).  About  the  same  time,  the  fragments,  arranged,  and  with  a 
translation,  were  published  by  Sharpe  in  the  transactions  of  the  Philolog 
ical  Society  (vol.  iv.,  No.  79,  p.  39,  seqq.) ;  and,  finally,  an  edition  was 
published  in  1850,  by  Babington,  London,  with  preliminary  dissertation 
and  notes.1  The  discovery  of  these  fragments  renders  the  accounts  of 
Brassicanus  and  Taylor  more  probable  than  they  have  been  accustomed 
to  be  regarded.  The  former  (Pro./,  ad  Salvianum),  who  lived  at  the  be 
ginning  of  the  seventeenth  century,  states  that  he  himself  saw  at  Ofen, 
in  the  library  of  King  Matthias  Corvinus,  a  complete  copy  of  Hyperides, 
with  numerous  scholia ;  and  Taylor  (Prof,  ad  Demos th.)  likewise  says 
that  he  saw  a  MS.  containing  some  orations  of  Hyperides. 

As  we  have,  therefore,  but  little  to  form  an  independent  opinion  upon 
respecting  the  merits  of  Hyperides,  we  must  acquiesce  in  the  judgment 
which  some  of  the  ancients  have  pronounced  upon  him.  That  he  was 
regarded  as  a  great  orator  is  attested  by  the  fact  of  his  speeches  being 
incorporated  in  the  canon  of  the  ten  Attic  orators,  and  of  several  distin 
guished  grammarians  having  written  commentaries  upon  them.  Hyper 
ides  did  not  bind  himself  to  any  particular  model ;  his  oratory  was  grace 
ful  and  powerful,  thus  holding  the  middle  between  the  gracefulness  of 
Lysias  and  the  overwhelming  power  of  Demosthenes.  His  delivery, 
however,  is  said  to  have  been  wanting  in  liveliness.  His  style  and  dic 
tion  were  pure  Attic,  though  not  quite  free  from  a  kind  of  mannerism, 
especially  in  certain  words.  But  his  orations  were  distinguished,  above 
all,  by  their  exquisite  elegance  and  gracefulness,  which  were  calculated, 
however,  to  produce  a  momentary  rather  than  a  lasting  and  moral  im 
pression.2 

10.  DINARCHUS  (Aeivapxos},3  tne  tenth  and  least  important  of  the  Attic 
orators,  was  born  at  Corinth  about  B.C.  361.4  Though  a  native  of  Cor 
inth,  he  lived  at  Athens  from  his  earliest  youth,  and  devoted  himself  with 
great  zeal  to  the  study  of  oratory  under  Theophrastus,  having,  at  the  same 
time,  profited  much  by  his  intercourse  with  Demetrius  Phalereus.5  As 
he  was  a  foreigner,  and  did  not  possess  the  Athenian  franchise,  he  was 
not  allowed  to  come  forward  himself  as  an  orator  or;  the  great  questions, 

1  Zeitschriftfur  die  Alter thumswiss.  (Bergk  und  Caesar),  Achter  Jahrgang,  1850,  p.  378. 

2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Id.  ib.  4  Dimys.,  Dinarch,,  4. 
5  IHonys.,  I  c.,  2;  Pint.,  Vit.  Dec.  Orat.,  p.  850, 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  293 

which  then  divided  public  opinion  at  Athens,  and  he  was  therefore  obliged 
to  content  himself  with  writing  orations  for  others.  He  appears  to  have 
commenced  this  career  in  his  twenty-sixth  year,  about  B..C.  336,  and  aa 
about  that  time  the  great  Attic  orators  died  away  one  after  the  other, 
Dinarchus  soon  acquired  considerable  reputation  and  great  wealth.  He 
belonged  to  the  friends  of  Phocion,  and  the  Macedonian  party,  and  took  a 
very  active  part  in  the  disputes  as  to  whether  Harpalus,  who  had  openly 
deserted  the  cause  of  Alexander  the  Great,  should  be  tolerated  at  Athens 
or  not.  The  time  of  his  greatest  activity  is  from  B.C.  317  to  B.C.  307, 
during  which  time  Demetrius  Phalereus  conducted  the  administration  of 
Athens.  But  when,  in  B.C.  307,  Demetrius  Poliorcetes  advanced  against 
Athens,  and  Demetrius  Phalereus  was  obliged  to  take  to  flight,  Dinar 
chus,  who  was  suspected  on  account  of  his  equivocal  political  conduct, 
and  who  was  anxious  to  save  his  riches,  fled  to  Chalcis,  in  Eubcea.  It 
was  not  till  fifteen  years  after,  B.C.  292,  that,  owing  to  the  exertions  of 
his  friend  Theophrastus,  he  obtained  permission  to  return  to  Athens, 
where  he  spent  the  last  years  of  his  life,  and  died  at  an  advanced  age. 
The  last  event  of  his  life  of  which  we  have  any  record  is  a  lawsuit  which 
he  instituted  against  his  faithless  friend,  Proxenus,  who  had  robbed  him 
of  his  property  ;  but  in  what  manner  the  suit  ended  is  unknown. 

The  number  of  orations  which  Dinarchus  wrote  is  uncertain,  for  De 
metrius  of  Magnesia1  ascribed  to  him  160,  while  Plutarch  and  Photius 
speak  only  of  sixty-four  genuine  ones  ;  and  Dionysius  is  of  opinion  that, 
among  the  eighty-seven  which  wrere  ascribed  to  him  in  his  time,  only 
sixty  were  genuine  productions  of  Dinarchus.  Of  all  these  orations  only 
three  have  come  down  to  us  entire,  and  all  three  refer  to  the  question 
about  Harpalus.  It  is,  however,  not  improbable  that  the  speech  against 
Theocrines,  which  is  usually  printed  among  those  of  Demosthenes,  is  like 
wise  a  production  of  Dinarchus.  The  titles  and  fragments  of  the  ora 
tions  which  are  lost  are  collected  by  Fabricius,a  and  more  completely  by 
Westermann.3  The  ancients,  such  as  Dionysius,  who  gives  an  accurate 
account  of  the  oratory  of  Dinarchus,  and  especially  Hermogenes,4  speak  in 
terms  of  commendation  of  his  orations  ;  but  there  were  others  also  who 
thought  less  favorably  of  him ;  some  grammarians  would  not  even  allow 
him  a  place  in  the  canon  of  the  ten  Attic  orators,  and  Dionysius  mentions 
that  he  was  treated  with  indifference  by  Callimachus  and  the  grammarians 
of  Pergamus.  However,  some  of  the  most  eminent  grammarians,  such 
as  Didymus  of  Alexandrea,  and  Heron  of  Athens,  did  not  disdain  to  write 
commentaries  upon  him.  The  orations  still  extant  enable  us  to  form  an 
independent  opinion  upon  the  merits  of  Dinarchus  ;  and  we  find  that  Di- 
onysius's  judgment  is,  on  the  whole,  quite  correct.  Dinarchus  was  a  man 
of  no  originality  of  mind,  and  it  is  difficult  to  say  whether  he  had  any  ora 
torical  talent  or  not.  His  want  of  genius  led  him  to  imitate  others,  such 
as  Lysias,  Hyperides,  and  more  especially  Demosthenes  ;  but  he  was  un 
able  to  come  up  to  his  great  model  in  any  point,  and  was  therefore  nick 
named  A7),uo(r0ej'7]s  6  &ypoLKos,  or  6  Kpidivos.  Even  Hermogenes,  his  great- 

i  Ap.  Dionys.,  l.c.,1.  *  Bill.  Gr.,  ii.,  p.  864,  seqq. 

3  Gcsch.  der  Griech.  Beredts.,  p.  311,  seqq.  *  De  Form.,  ii.,  11. 


294  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

est  admirer,  does  not  deny  that  his  style  had  a  certain  roughness,  whence 
his  orations  were  thought  to  resemble  those  of  Aristogiton.  Although  it 
can  not  be  denied  that  Dinarchus  is  the  best  among  the  many  imitators 
of  Demosthenes,  yet  he  is  far  inferior  to  him  in  power  and  energy,  in  the 
choice  of  his  expressions,  in  invention,  clearness,  and  the  arrangement 
of  his  subjects.1 

The  orations  of  Dinarchus  are  contained  in  the  various  collections  of  Attic  orators  al 
ready  mentioned.  There  are  two  good  separate  editions,  one  by  Schmidt,  Leipzig,  1826, 
8vo,  and  the  other  by  Matzner,  Berlin,  1842,  8vo.  There  is  also  a  useful  commentary 
on  Dinarchus  by  Wurm,  "  Commentarius  in  Dinarchi  Orationes  ires,"  Nuremburg,  1828, 
8vo. 


CHAPTER  XXXV. 

FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD— continued. 

III.     SCHOOL     OF     PHILOSOPHY. 

I.  OUR  remarks  on  the  earlier  Greek  philosophy  closed  with  a  brief 
sketch  of  the  school  of  Pythagoras.     The  period  that  now  comes  under 
consideration  embraces  some  of  the  most  important  and  singular  specu 
lations  in  which  the  human  mind  has  ever  indulged,  and  deserves  a  much 
more  extended  examination  than  our  limits  will  allow  us  to  give.    All  that 
we  can  do  will  be  to  enumerate  the  several  schools  of  philosophy  that 
marked  the  period  under  review,  and  give  a  brief  sketch  of  the  eminent 
individuals  who  either  founded,  enlarged,  or  adorned  them. 

II.  The  different  schools  or  sects  which,  according  to  this  arrange 
ment,  will  occupy  our  attention,  are  the  following  :  1.  The  Atomic ;  2.  The 
Sophistic;  3.  The  Socratic;   4.  The    Cyrenaic ;  5.  The  Mcgaric  ;  6.  The 
Eliac  and  Eretriac ;  7.  The  Academic ;  8.  The  Cynic ;  9.  The  Peripatetic ; 
10.  The  Stoic;  11.  The  Skeptical;  12.  The  Epicurean. 

1.     THE     ATOMIC     SCHOOL. 

III.  The  founder  of  the  Atomic  theory  of  the  ancient  philosophy  is  ad 
mitted  on  all  hands  to  have  been  LEUCIPPUS  (AevKLTnros).u    Where  and 
when  he  was  born  we  have  no  data  for  deciding,  Miletus,  Abdera,  and 
Elea  having  been  assigned  as  his  birth-place  ;  the  first,  apparently  for  no 
other  reason  than  because  it  was  the  birth-place  of  several  natural  phi 
losophers  ;  the  second,  because  Democritus  came  from  that  city ;  the 
third,  because  he  was  looked  upon  as  a  disciple  of  the  Eleatic  school. 
The  period  when  he  lived  is  equally  uncertain.     He  is  called  the  teacher 
of  Democritus,3  the  disciple  of  Parmenides,4  or,  according  to  other  ac 
counts,  of  Zeno,  of  Melissus,  nay,  even  of  Pythagoras.5     With  regard  to 
his  philosophical  system  it  is  impossible  to  speak  with  certainty,  since  the 
writers  who  mention  him  either  speak  of  him  in  conjunction  with  De 
mocritus,  or  attribute  to  him  doctrines  which  are  in  like  manner  attrib 
uted  to  Democritus. 


Smith,  1.  c.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Diog.  Laert.,  ix.,  34. 

Simplic.,  Phys.,fol.  7,  A.  5  Simplic.,  1.  c. ;  Diog.  Laert.,  ix.,  30,  <tc. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  295 


IV.  DEMOCRITUS  (Aq/itfaptro*)1  was  a  native  of  Abdera,  in  Thrace,  an 
Ionian  colony  of  Teos,  and  was  born  about  B.C.  460.  He  was  thus  forty 
years  younger  than  Anaxagoras,  and  eight  years  younger  than  Socrates. 
His  father,  Hegesistratus  —  or,  as  others  call  him,  Damasippus  or  Ath- 
enocritus—  was  possessed  of  so  large  a  property,  that  he  was  able  to  en 
tertain  Xerxes  on  his  march  through  Abdera.  Democritus  spent  the  in 
heritance  which  his  father  left  him  on  travels  into  distant  countries,  which 
he  undertook  to  satisfy  his  extraordinary  thirst  for  knowledge.  He  is 
said  to  have  visited  Egypt  that  he  might  learn  geometry  from  the  Egyp 
tian  priests  ;  to  have  been  in  Persia  with  the  magi,  and  with  the  gym- 
nosophists  in  India  ;  and  to  have  penetrated  to  ^Ethiopia.8  He  sojourned 
for  some  time  at  Athens  ;  but  from  contempt  of  notoriety,  as  it  is  said, 
was  known  to  nobody  in  that  city.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  Demetrius 
Phalereus,  as  cited  by  Diogenes  Laertius,3  contended  that  Democritus 
had  never  visited  Athens.  One  result  of  his  extensive  travels  was,  as 
we  have  already  remarked,  that  he  expended  all  his  patrimony,  which  is 
said  to  have  exceeded  100  talents.  Now  it  was  a  law  of  his  native  city, 
that  any  one  who  spent  his  whole  patrimony  should  not  be  buried  within 
the  limits  of  his  country  ;  but  Democritus  having  read  his  chief  work  aloud 
to  his  fellow-citizens,  so  impressed  them  with  an  admiration  of  his  learn 
ing,  that  he  not  only  obtained  a  special  exemption  from  the  above  law, 
but  was  presented  with  500  talents,  and  at  his  death  was  buried  at  the 
public  expense.  A  story  substantially  the  same,  though  varying  some 
what  in  detail,  is  given  in  Athenaeus.  He  is  said  to  have  continued  trav 
elling  till  he  was  eighty  years  old.  He  died  B.C.  357,  at  the  age  of  104, 
the  same  year  in  which  Hippocrates  is  said  to  have  died.  There  is  a  story 
of  his  having  protracted  his  life  for  three  days  after  death  seemed  inevi 
table,  by  means  of  the  smell  of  either  bread  or  honey,  in  order  to  gratify 
his  sister,  who,  had  he  died  when  first  he  seemed  likely  to  die,  would 
have  been  prevented  from  attending  a  festival  of  Ceres. 

Democritus  loved  solitude,  and  was  wholly  wrapped  up  in  study. 
There  are  several  anecdotes  illustrative  of  his  devotion  to  knowledge, 
and  his  disregard  of  every  thing  else.  They  conflict  somewhat  with  one 
another  in  their  details,  but  accuracy  of  detail  is  not  to  be  looked  for,  and, 
tending  as  they  all  do  to  the  same  point,  they  prove,  which  is  all  that  we 
can  expect  to  know,  what  character  was  traditionally  assigned  to  Demo 
critus.  Cicero  speaks  of  him  as,  like  Anaxagoras,  leaving  his  lands  un 
cultivated  in  his  undivided  care  for  learning  ;  while,  as  an  instance  of 
how  these  stories  conflict,  Diogenes  Laertius  represents  him  as  having, 
on  the  division  of  the  paternal  estate  with  his  two  brothers,  taken  his 
own  share  entirely  in  money,  as  being  more  convenient  than  land  for  a 
traveller.  Valerius  Maximus  makes  him  show  his  contempt  for  worldly 
things  by  giving  almost  the  whole  of  his  patrimony  to  his  country.  He 
is  said,  too,  to  have  put  out  his  own  eyes,  that  he  might  not  be  diverted 
from  thought  ;  but  it  is  more  probable  that  he  may  have  lost  his  sight  by 
too  severe  application  to  study.  This  loss,  however,  did  not  disturb  the 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  etc.,  DeFin.,  v.,  19  ;  Strabo,  xvi.,  p.  703. 

3  Diog.  Laert.i  ix.,  34,  seqfj. 


296 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


cheerful  disposition  of  his  mind  and  his  views  of  human  life,  which 
prompted  him  every  where  to  look  at  the  cheerful  and  comical  side  of 
things,  a  course  of  conduct  which  later  writers  took  to  mean  that  he  al 
ways  laughed  at  the  follies  of  men. 

Of  the  extent  of  his  knowledge,  which  embraced  not  only  natural  sci 
ences,  mathematics,  mechanics,1  grammar,  music,  and  philosophy,  but 
various  other  useful  arts,  we  may  form  some  notion  from  the  list  of  his 
numerous  works  which  is  given  by  Diogenes  Laertius,2  and  which,  as 
Diogenes  expressly  states,  contains  only  his  genuine  works.  The  im 
portance  which  was  attached  to  the  researches  of  Democritus  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  Aristotle  is  reported  to  have  written  a  work  in  two 
books  on  the  problems  of  this  philosopher,2  His  works  were  composed 
in  the  Ionic  dialect,  though  not  without  some  admixture  of  the  local  pe 
culiarities  of  Abdera.  They  are  much  praised  by  Cicero  on  account  of 
the  poetical  beauties  and  the  liveliness  of  their  style,  and  are  in  this  re 
spect  compared  even  with  the  works  of  Plato.4  Unfortunately,  not  one 
of  his  works  has  come  down  to  us,  and  the  treatise  which  we  possess 
under  his. name  is  considered  spurious.  Comparatively  few  fragments 
have  even  reached  us,  and  these  fragments  refer  more  to  ethics  than  to 
physical  matters. 

Democritus  followed  Leucippus  by  a  very  short  distance  of  time,  and 
preceded  Epicurus  by  somewhat  less  than  a  century,  as  an  expounder  of 
the  atomic  or  corpuscular  philosophy.  He  viewed  all  matter  as  reducible 
to  particles,  which  are  themselves  indivisible,  and  are  hence  called  atoms 
(&TO/JI.OI,  a  priv.  and  ropf]).  He  included  mind  under  the  head  of  matter, 
recognizing  only  matter  and  empty  space  as  composing  the  universe,  and 
viewed  mind  as  consisting  of  round  atoms  of  fire.  Arguing  that  nothing 
could  arise  out  of  nothing,  and  also  that  nothing  could  utterly  perish  and 
become  nothing,  he  contended  for  the  eternity  of  the  universe,  and  thus 
dispensed  with  a  creator.  He  farther  explained  the  difference  in  mate 
rial  substances  (mind,  as  has  been  said,  being  one  of  them)  by  a  difference 
in  the  nature  and  arrangement  of  their  component  atoms,  and  all  material 
(including  mental)  phenomena  by  different  motions,  progressive  or  re 
gressive,  straight  or  circular,  taking  place  among  these  atoms,  and  taking 
place  of  necessity.  Thus  the  cosmology  of  Democritus  was  essentially 
atheistic.  In  psychology  he  explained  sensation,  as  did  Epicurus  after 
him,  by  supposing  particles,  eftJeoAa,  as  he  called  them,  or  sensible  images, 
to  issue  from  bodies.  He  also  thought  to  explain  men's  belief  in  gods  by 
the  supposed  existence  of  large  images  of  human  form  in  the  air.  In 
moral  philosophy  he  announced  nothing  more  than  that  a  cheerful  state 
of  mind  (evdvfj.ia)  was  the  one  thing  to  be  sought  after,  this  tranquillity  of 
mind  and  freedom  from  fear  and  passion,  from  the  dread  of  death  and 
from  all  apprehension  of  gods  or  superstitious  emotions,  being  the  fairest 
fruit  of  philosophic  inquiry.8 

There  is  a  very  good  collection  of  the  fragments  of  Democritus  by  Mullach,  Democriti 

1  Brandts,  Rhein.  Mus.,  iii.,  p.  134,  seqq.          2  Diog.  Laert.,  ix.,  46,  seqq. 

3  Id.,  v.,  26.  4  Czc.,  De  Div.,  ii.,  64  ;  De  Orat.,  i.,  11. 

6  Penny  Cyclop.,  viii.,  p.  380  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  297 

AbderitoB  Operum  fragmenta,  Berlin,  1843,  8vo,  containing  elaborate  dissertations  on  the 
life  and  writings  of  Democritus.  The  student  may  also  consult  Burchardt,  Comment. 
Crit.  de  Democriti  de  sensibus  philosophia,  in  two  programmes,  Minden,  1830  and  1839, 
4to  ;  Burchardt,  Fragmente  der  Moral  des  Demokrit,  Minden,  1834,  4to  ;  Heimsoth,  Demo 
criti  de  anima  doctrina,  Bonn,  1835,  8vo  ;  Orelli,  Opusc.  Grcec.  sent.,  vol.  i.,  p.  91,  seqq.; 
Ritter,  Gesch.  d.  Philos.,\ol.  L,  p.  559,  seqq.  (vol.  i.,  p.  544,  seqq.,  Eng.  transl.),  and  the 
article  of  Brandis  in  Smith's  Biographical  Dictionary,  s.  v.  Concerning  the  spurious 
works  and  letters  of  Democritus,  consult  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Gr.,  i.,  p.  683,  seqq. ;  ii.,  p. 
641,  &c. 

II.    THE     SOPHISTIC     SCHOOL. 

I.  It  is  well  known  that  the  term  ffotyio-r-fis  at  first  had  an  honorable 
meaning,  and  was  synonymous  with  ffo$6s,  a  sage,  a  scholar  in  the  widest 
sense,  for  even  artists  were  comprehended  in  it.     Protagoras  was  the 
first  who  adopted  the  name  of  <ro<j>t<TT-f)s,  to  distinguish  more  decidedly 
one  who  makes  others  wise,  especially  one  who  taught  eloquence,  the 
art  of  governing,  politics,  or,  in  short,  any  kind  of  practical  knowledge. 
From  that  time  the  word  "  sophist"  acquired  that  odious  meaning  which 
it  retains  at  the  present  day.  Afterward,  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  emper 
ors,  the  name  of  sophist  again  became,  for  a  while,  an  honorable  appel 
lation,  and  was  applied  to  the  rhetoricians  or  teachers  of  eloquence.1 

II.  The  race  of  Sophists,  whose  enmity  to  Socrates,  their  great  oppo 
nent,  has  perhaps  been  the  principal  cause  of  their  celebrity,  was  not 
without  influence  on  the  philosophy  and  literature  of  Greece.    They  were 
a  class  of  men  who  went  about  Greece  discoursing  and  debating,  and 
sometimes  educating  the  youthful  sons  of  rich  and  noble  families.     The 
cause  of  their  success  lay  in  the  very  nature  and  habits  of  the  Greek 
people,  who  were  so  much  addicted  to  talk  and  so  little  to  study,  who 
were  so  passionately  fond  of  and  so  easily  led  by  rhetoric ;  and  the  easy 
triumph  which  a  fluent  talker  can  always  obtain,  by  a  rapid  and  artful 
confusion  of  words  and  ideas,  must  also  have  operated  in  their  favor. 

III.  The  period  at  which  the  Sophists  flourished  was  one  of  obsolete 
creeds,  one  lifeless  from  the  want  of  some  vivifying  faith.     Religion  was 
attacked  by  open  skepticism ;  the  whole  sect  of  the  Eleatics,  with  the 
exception  of  Empedocles,  if  he,  in  truth,  belonged  to  them,  appear  to 
have  handled  the  history  of  the  gods  with  arbitrary  and  allegorizing  bold 
ness.     Even  the  pious  Pythagorean  adopted  the  old  religion  merely  in  a 
peculiar  sense  of  his  own.     Heraclitus  argued  against  its  probability ; 
Anaxagoras  understood  it  allege rically  ;  and,  lastly,  Hippo  was  regarded 
as  an  open  and  avowed  atheist.     Every  thing  human  and  divine  had  lost 
its  earnest  nature,  and  came  to  be  regarded  as  an  art,  a  mere  exercise  of 
ingenuity.     The  art  of  the  Sophists  was  oratory,  and  their  boast  was  that 
by  it  they  could  make  the  worse  appear  the  better  cause.     Their  doc 
trines,  indeed,  closely  resembled  those  of  the  Skeptics,  since  they  equally 
denied  the  possibility  of  truth,  and  even  interdicted  inquiry  into  it ;  but 
the  distinction  between  these  sects  consisted  in  the  Sophists'  not  mask 
ing  their  arrogance  under  doubt,  but  boldly  and  distinctly  averring  that 
there  was  no  truth  at  all,  and  seeking  to  communicate  this  wisdom  to 
others,  to  save  them  the  trouble  of  investigation.2 

1  Penny  Cyclop.,  xxii.,  257.  '-'  Ibid. 


298  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

IV.  That  all  knowledge  is  subjective,  that  it  is  true  only  for  the  individ 
ual,  was  the  meaning  of  the  celebrated  saying  of  PROTAGORAS  of  Abdera, 
namely,  ir&vrwv  p-trpov  fodpanros.     Protagoras  was  the  first  who  called 
himself  a  sophist,  and  taught  for  pay.     He  made  his  appearance  at  Ath 
ens  in  the  time  of  Pericles  (about  B.C.  444),  and  for  a  long  time  enjoyed 
a  great  reputation  there,  till  at  last  a  reaction  was  caused  by  the  bold 
skepticism  of  his  opinions,  and  he  was  banished  from  Athens,  and  his 
books  were  publicly  burned.     Agreeing  with  Heraclitus  in  regard  to  the 
doctrine  of  a  perpetual  motion,  and  of  a  continual  change  in  the  impres 
sions  and  perceptions  of  men,  he  deduced  from  this  that  the  individual 
could  know  nothing  beyond  these  ever-varying  perceptions ;  consequent 
ly,  that  whatever  appeared  to  be  was  so  for  the  individual.     According  to 
this  doctrine,  opposite  opinions  on  the  same  subject  might  be  equally 
true  ;  and  if  an  opinion  were  only  supported  by  a  momentary  appearance 
of  truth,  this  was  sufficient  to  make  it  true  for  the  moment.     Hence  it 
was  one  of  the  great  feats  which  Protagoras  and  the  other  Sophists  pro 
fessed  to  perform,  to  be  able  to  speak  with  equal  plausibility  for  and 
against  the  same  positions  ;  not  in  order  to  diseover  the  truth,  but  in  or 
der  to  show  the  nothingness  of  truth.     It  was  not,  however,  the  intention 
of  Protagoras  to  deprive  virtue,  as  well  as  truth,  of  its  reality,  but  he  re 
duced  virtue  to  a  mere  state  or  condition  of  the  subject — a  set  of  impres 
sions  and  feelings  which  rendered  the  subject  more  capable  of  active  use 
fulness.1 

V.  GORGIAS  of  Leontini,  whom  we  have  spoken  of  elsewhere,  proceed 
ed  from  an  older  philosophic  school  than  Protagoras,  but  yet  there  was  a 
great  correspondence  between  the  pursuits  of  the  two  ;  and  from  this  we 
may  clearly  see  how  strongly  the  spirit  of  the  age  must  have  inclined  to 
the  form  and  mode  of  speculation  which  was  common  to  them  both. 
Gorgias  undertook  to  prove  that  nothing  exists ;  that  even  if  any  thing 
did  exist,  it  would  not  be  cognizable,  and  even  if  it  both  existed  and  were 
cognizable,  it  could  not  be  conveyed  and  communicated  by  words.     The 
result  was  that  absolute  knowledge  was  unattainable  ;  and  that  the  prop 
er  end  of  instruction  was  to  awaken  in  the  pupil's  mind  such  conceptions 
as  are  suitable  to  his  own  purposes  and  interests.     The  chief  distinction 
between  Gorgias  and  the  other  sophists  consisted  in  the  frankness  with 
which  he  admitted  that  he  promised  and  professed  nothing  else  than  to 
make  his  scholars  apt  rhetoricians  ;  and  the  ridicule  with  which  he  treat 
ed  those  of  his  colleagues  who  professed  to  teach  virtue,  a  peculiarity 
which  Gorgias  shared  with  all  the  other  Sophists  of  Sicily.     The  Sophists 
in  the  mother  country,  on  the  other  hand,  endeavored  to  awaken  useful 
thoughts,  and  to  teach  the  principles  of  practical  philosophy :  thus  HIP- 
PIAS  of  Elis,  the  contemporary  of  Socrates,  endeavored  to  season  his 
lessons  with  a  display  of  multifarious  knowledge,  and  may  be  regarded 
as  the  first  Polyhistor  among  the  Greeks,  though  in  other  respects  re 
markable  for  vanity  and  boastful  arrogance.     So,  again,  PRODICUS  of  Ceos, 
another  contemporary  of  Socrates,  and  perhaps  the  most  respectable 
among  the  Sophists,  used  to  present  lessons  of  morality  under  an  agreea- 

1  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  73. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  299 

ble  form ;  such,  for  instance,  as  the  well-known  allegory  of  the  choice 
of  Hercules.1 

VI.  In  general,  however,  the  labors  of  the  Sophists  were  prejudicial 
alike  to  the  moral  condition  of  Greece  and  to  the  serious  pursuit  of  knowl 
edge.     The  national  morality,  which  drew  the  line  between  right  and 
wrong,  though  not,  perhaps,  according  to  the  highest  standard,  yet,  at  any 
rate,  with  honest  views,  and,  what  was  of  most  importance,  with  a  sort 
of  instinctive  certainty,  had  received  a  shock  from  the  boldness  with 
which  philosophy  had  handled  it,  and  could  not  but  be  altogether  under 
mined  by  a  doctrine  which  destroyed  the  distinction  between  truth  and 
falsehood.     And  though  Protagoras  and  Gorgias  shrank  from  declaring 
that  virtue  and  religion  were  nothing  but  empty  illusions,  their  disciples 
and  followers  did  so  most  openly,  when  the  liberty  of  speculation  was 
completely  emancipated  from  all  the  restraints  of  traditionary  opinions. 
In  the  course  of  the  Peloponnesian  war,  a  class  of  society  was  formed  at 
Athens  which  was  not  without  influence  on  the  course  of  affairs,  and 
whose  creed  was  that  justice  and  belief  in  the  gods  were  but  the  inven 
tions  of  ancient  rulers  and  legislators,  who  gave  them  currency  in  order 
to  strengthen  their  hold  on  the  common  herd,  and  assist  them  in  the 
business  of  government.     They  sometimes  gave  this  opinion  with  this 
far  more  pernicious  variation,  that  laws  were  made  by  the  majority  of 
weaker  men  for  their  protection,  whereas  nature  had  sanctioned  the  right 
of  the  strongest,  so  that  the  stronger  party  did  but  use  his  right  when  he 
compelled  the  wreaker  to  minister  to  his  pleasures  as  far  as  he  could.3 

VII.  If,  however,  wre  turn  from  the  influence  of  the  Sophists  on  the 
spirit  of  their  age,  and  set  ourselves  to  inquire  what  they  did  for  the  im 
provement  of  written  compositions,  we  are  constrained  to  set  a  very  high 
value  on  their  services.     The  formation  of  an  artificial  prose  style  is  due 
entirely  to  the  Sophists,  and  although  they  did  not  at  first  proceed  ac 
cording  to  a  right  method,  they  may  be  considered  as  having  laid  a  foun 
dation  for  the  polished  diction  of  Plato  and  Demosthenes.     The  Sophists 
of  Greece  Proper,  as  well  as  those  of  Sicily,  made  language  the  object  of 
their  study,  but  with  this  distinction,  that  the  former  aimed  at  correctness, 
the  latter  at  beauty  of  style.     Protagoras  investigated  the  principles  of 
accurate  composition  (opfloeVeta),  though  practically  he  was  distinguished 
for  a  copious  fluency,  which  Plato's  Socrates  vainly  attempted  to  bridle 
with  his  dialectic  ;  and  Prodicus  busied  himself  with  inquiries  into  the  sig 
nification  and  correct  use  of  words,  and  the  discrimination  of  synonyms. 
His  own  discourses  were  full  of  such  distinctions,  as  appears  from  the 
humorous  imitation  of  his  style  in  Plato's  Protagoras.3 

VIII.  The  view  here  taken  of  the  Sophists  is  the  one  that  is  commonly 
entertained  respecting  them.     It  may  not  be  amiss,  however,  before  con 
cluding,  to  state  briefly  the  sentiments  of  an  eminent  historical  writer  on 
the  subject,  and  to  show  the  contrast  between  his  views  and  the  popular 
representation  of  the  Sophists.     According  to  the  common  notion,  they 
were  a  sect ;  according  to  Grote,  they  were  a  class  or  profession.     Ac 
cording  to  the  common  view,  they  were  the  propagators  of  demoralizing 

i  Muller,  Hist.  Gr.  Lit.,  vol.  ii  ,  p.  37.  3  Id.  ib.,  p.  74.  3  Id.  tit. 


300  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

doctrines,  and  (what  from  them  are  termed)  "  sophistical"  argumenta 
tions  ;  according  to  Grote,  they  were  the  regular  teachers  of  Greek  mo 
rality,  neither  above  nor  below  the  standard  of  the  age.  According  to 
the  common  view,  Socrates  was  the  great  opponent  of  the  Sophists,  and 
Plato  his  natural  successor  in  the  same  combat ;  according  to  Grote,  So 
crates  was  the  great  representative  of  the  Sophists,  distinguished  from 
them  only  by  his  higher  eminence,  and  by  the  peculiarity  of  his  mode  of 
life  and  teaching.  According  to  the  common  view,  Plato  and  his  follow 
ers  were  the  authorized  teachers,  the  established  clergy  of  the  Greek 
nation,  and  the  Sophists  the  dissenters  ;  according  to  Grote,  the  Sophists 
were  the  established  clergy,  and  Plato  was  the  dissenter — the  Socialist, 
who  attacked  the  Sophists  (as  he  attacked  the  poets  and  the  statesmen), 
not  as  a  particular  sect,  but  as  one  of  the  existing  orders  of  society.1 

III.     THE     SOU  RATIO     SCHOOL. 

I.  SOCRATES  (SwKpar^s),2  the  celebrated  Athenian  philosopher,  was  born 
in  the  demus  of  Alopece,  in  the  immediate  neighborhood  of  Athens,  B.C. 
469.  His  father,  Sophroniscus,  was  a  statuary ;  his  mother,  Phaenarete, 
was  a  midwife.  In  his  youth  he  followed  the  profession  of  his  father,  and 
attained  sufficient  proficiency  to  have  executed  the  group  of  the  Graces, 
clothed  in  flowing  drapery,  which  was  preserved  in  the  Acropolis,  and 
was  shown  as  his  work  down  to  the  time  of  Pausanias.3  He  did  not, 
however,  devote  himself  to  this  profession  ;  he  carried  it  on  so  far  as  to 
earn  a  decent  subsistence  from  it,  but  was  content  to  devote  the  greater 
part  of  his  time  and  talents  to  the  study  of  philosophy,  for  which  he  had 
a  strong  natural  inclination.  While  still  engaged  in  statuary,  and  much 
more  so  after  he  had  given  it  up,  he  spent  a  great  part  of  his  time  in  read 
ing  all  the  accessible  works  of  former  and  contemporary  philosophers. 
Crito  supplied  him  with  money  to  pay  the  masters  who  taught  various 
branches  at  Athens,  and  he  became  an  auditor  of  many  of  the  eminent 
teachers  of  the  day,  though  he  appears,  in  truth,  to  have  owed  very  much 
to  his  own  habits  of  study  and  self-examination. 

The  personal  qualities  of  Socrates  were  marked  and  striking.  His  phys 
ical  constitution  was  healthy,  robust,  and  enduring  to  an  extraordinary 
degree.  He  was  capable  of  bearing  fatigue  or  hardship,  and  indifferent 
to  heat  or  cold,  in  a  measure  which  astonished  all  his  companions.  He 
went  barefoot  in  all  seasons  of  the  year,  even  during  the  winter  campaign 
at  Potidsea,  under  the  severe  frosts  of  Thrace  ;  and  the  same  clothing 
sufficed  for  him  in  winter  as  well  as  in  summer.*  His  forbidding  physi 
ognomy  excited  the  jests  both  of  his  friends  and  enemies,  who  inform  us 
that  he  had  a  flat  nose,  thick  lips,  and  prominent  eyes,  like  a  satyr  or 
Silenus.  To  all  this  was  added  the  protuberance  of  a  Falstaff-stomach, 
which  no  necessary  hardships,  no  voluntary  exercise  could  bring  down. 
In  his  moral  character  he  wTas  most  exemplary.  In  all  situations,  he  ex- 

1  Quarterly  Review,  No.  175,  p.  53,  note. 

2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. ;  Penny  Cyclop.,  xxii.,  p.  182,  seqq. 

3  Pausan.,  ix.,  35;  compare  i.,  22;  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  19. 

*  Plat.,  Sympos.,  p.  219,  seqq.;  Alcib.,  p.  194  ;  Diog.  Laert.,  i.,  22,  seq. 


ATTIC    PERIOD.  301 

ercised  that  self-command  which  is  founded  on  virtuous  principles,  and 
strengthened  by  reflection  and  habit ;  and,  in  acquiring  this  entire  domin 
ion  over  his  passions  and  appetites,  he  had  the  greater  merit,  as  it  was 
not  effected  without  a  violent  struggle  against  naturally  impetuous  appe 
tites.1 

Of  the  circumstances  of  his  life  we  are  almost  wholly  ignorant.  With 
regard,  however,  to  his  public  career,  we  know  that  he  served  his  coun 
try  faithfully  as  a  soldier,  according  to  the  duty  of  all  Athenian  citizens. 
During  the  Peloponnesian  war  he  made  three  several  campaigns.  In  the 
first  of  these  he  took  part  in  the  long  blockade  of  Potidaea,2  and  Alcibi- 
ades,  in  Plato's  Symposium,  gives  a  full  account  of  his  extraordinary  hardi 
hood  and  valor  during  this  long  service.  He  endured  with  the  greatest 
indifference  hunger  and  thirst,  heat  and  cold :  in  one  of  the  skirmishes 
which  took  place,  Alcibiades  fell,  wounded,  in  the  midst  of  the  enemy ; 
Socrates  rescued  him,  and  carried  him  off,  together  with  his  arms,  for 
which  exploit  the  generals  awarded  him  the  prize  of  valor  (TO.  apzo-reta) ; 
this,  however,  he  transferred  to  Alcibiades.  The  scene  of  his  second 
campaign  was  Bceotia,  where  he  fought  for  his  country  in  the  disastrous 
battle  of  Delium.  Here  he  saved  the  life  of  another  of  his  pupils,  Xeno- 
phon,  whom  he  carried  from  the  field  on  his  shoulder,  fighting  his  way  as 
he  went.  In  his  third  campaign  he  served  at  Amphipolis.  The  merit 
of  his  civil  services  wras  equally  conspicuous.  As  president  of  the  day, 
when  a  member  of  the  senate,  he  refused  to  put  the  vote  for  the  iniqui 
tous  condemnation  of  the  victors  of  Arginusse,3  and  on  a  subsequent  occa 
sion  resolutely  disobeyed  the  mandate  of  the  Thirty  tyrants  for  the  appre 
hension  of  Leon  the  Salaminian."1 

Socrates  took  no  part  in  the  concerns  of  the  state.  Entertaining,  as 
he  did,  the  most  lively  conviction  that  he  was  called  by  the  Deity  to 
strive,  by  means  of  his  teaching  and  life,  after  a  revival  of  moral  feeling, 
and  the  laying  of  a  scientific  foundation  for  it,5  he  conceived  that  an  in 
ternal  divine  voice  had  warned  him  against  participating  in  political  af 
fairs.6  When  it  was  that  he  first  recognized  this  vocation,  can  not  be  as 
certained  ;  and  probably  it  was  by  degrees  that,  owing  to  the  need  which 
he  felt,  in  the  intercourse  of  minds,  of  coming  to  an  understanding  with 
himself,  he  betook  himself  to  the  active  duties  of  a  teacher.  But  he  never 
opened  a  school,  nor  did  he,  like  the  Sophists  of  his  time,  deliver  public 
lectures.  Every  where,  in  the  market-place,  in  the  gymnasia,  and  in  the 
work-shops,  he  sought  and  found  opportunities  for  awakening  and  guid 
ing,  in  boys,  youths,  and  men,  moral  consciousness,  and  the  impulse  after 
self-knowledge  respecting  the  end  and  value  of  our  actions.  But  he  only 
endeavored  to  aid  in  developing  the  germs  of  knowledge  which  were  al 
ready  in  them,  not  to  communicate  to  them  ready-made  knowledge.  Un- 
weariedly  and  inexorably  did  he  fight  against  all  false  appearance  and 
conceit  of  knowledge  ;  and  hence,  to  the  mentally  proud  and  the  mental 
ly  idle  he  appeared  an  intolerable  bore,  and  often  enough  experienced 

1  Cic.,  De  Fato,  5  ;  Alex.  Aphrod.,  p.  30,  ed.  Lond.  2  Plat.,  I.  c. 

3  Xen.,  Mem.,  i.,  1,  18.  *  Plat.,  Apol.,  p.  32 ;  IHog.  Laert.,  ii.,  24. 

5  Plat.,  Apol.,  p.  30, 31,  33  ;  Eiithyph.,  p.  2.      e  piat.,  1.  c.,  p.  31, 36  ;  Xen.,  Ulem.,  i,  6, 15. 


302  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

their  bitter  hatred  and  calumny.  Such  persons  might  easily  be  misled  by 
the  "  Clouds"  of  Aristophanes  into  regarding  Socrates  as  the  head  of  the 
Sophists,  although  he  was  their  victorious  opponent. 

That  the  condemnation,  however,  of  Socrates  was  at  all  connected 
with  the  exhibition  which  Aristophanes  makes  of  him  in  the  "  Clouds,"  is 
a  thing  altogether  improbable,  since  the  first  exhibition  of  this  comedy 
preceded  the  prosecution  and  condemnation  of  the  philosopher  by  twenty- 
four  years,  though  it  must  be  confessed  that  it  had  produced  an  unfavor 
able  opinion  respecting  him.  The  motive  for  the  production  of  that  com 
edy,  on  the  part  of  Aristophanes,  does  not  appear  to  have  been  personal 
enmity,  but  to  have  sprung  from  the  conviction  that  the  ancient  faith  and 
the  ancient  manners  could  be  regained  only  by  thrusting  aside  all  phi 
losophy  that  dealt  in  subtleties,  and  hence  he  represented  Socrates,  the 
best  known  of  the  philosophers,  as  the  head  of  that  sophistical  system 
which  was  burying  all  morals  and  piety. 

Attached  to  none  of  the  prevailing  parties,  Socrates  found  in  each  of 
them  his  friends  and  his  enemies.  Hated  and  persecuted  by  Critias,  Char- 
icles,  and  others  among  the  Thirty  tyrants,  who  had  a  special  reference 
to  him  in  the  decree  which  they  issued  forbidding  the  teaching  of  the  art 
of  oratory,1  he  was  impeached  after  their  banishment  and  by  their  op 
ponents.  An  orator  named  Lycon,  and  a  poet  (a  friend  of  Thrasybulus) 
named  Meletus,  had  united  in  the  impeachment  with  the  powerful  dema 
gogue  Anytus,  an  embittered  antagonist  of  the  Sophists  and  their  system.'-1 
The  chief  articles  of  impeachment  were,  that  Socrates  was  guilty  of  cor 
rupting  the  youth,  and  of  despising  the  tutelary  deities  of  the  state,  put 
ting  in  their  place  other  new  divinities.3  At  the  same  time,  it  had  been 
made  a  matter  of  accusation  against  him  that  Critias,  the  most  ruthless 
of  the  Tyrants,  had  come  forth  from  his  school.4  Some  expressions  of 
his,  in  which  he  had  found  fault  with  the  democratical  mode  of  electing  by 
lot,  had  also  been  brought  against  him  ;5  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that 
use  was  made  of  his  friendly  relations  with  Theramenes,  one  of  the  most 
influential  of  the  Thirty,  with  Plato's  uncle  Charmides,  who  fell  by  the 
side  of  Critias  in  the  struggle  with  the  popular  party,  and  also  with  oth 
er  aristocrats,  in  order  to  irritate  against  him  the  party  which  at  that 
time  was  dominant.  The  substance  of  the  speech  which  Socrates  de 
livered  in  his  defence  is  probably  preserved  by  Plato  in  the  piece  which 
goes  under  the  name  of  the  "  Apology  of  Socrates."  Being  condemned 
by  a  majority  of  only  six  votes,  and  called  upon  to  speak  in  mitigation 
of  the  sentence,  instead  of  suing  for  any  diminution  of  punishment,  he 
expressed  the  conviction  that  he  deserved  no  punishment  at  all,  but 
rather  to  be  maintained  at  the  public  cost  in  the  Prytaneum,  and  refused, 
therefore,  to  acquiesce  in  the  adjudication  of  imprisonment,  or  a  large 
fine,  or  banishment.  He  would  assent  to  nothing  more  than  a  fine  of 
sixty  minse,  on  the  security  of  Plato,  Crito,  and  others  of  his  friends.  Con- 

i  Xen.,  Mem.,  i.,  2,  31,  37.  2  Plat.,  Meno,  p.  91. 

3  Plat.,  Apol.,  p.  23,  24  ;  Xen.,  Mem.,  i.,  1,  1 :  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  40. 
*  Xen.,  Mem.,  i.,  2,  12.     Compare  JEschin.  c.  Timarch.,  t)  173,  Bekker. 
6  Xen.,  I  c.,  i.,2,9. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  303 

demned  to  death  by  the  judges,  who  were  incensed  by  this  speech,  by  a 
majority  of  eighty  votes,  he  departed  from  them  with  the  protestation 
that  he  would  rather  die  after  such  a  defence,  than  live  after  one  in  which 
he  had  endeavored  to  excite  their  pity. 

The  sentence  of  death,  however,  could  not  be  carried  into  execution 
until  after  the  return  of  the  vessel  which  had  been  sent  to  Delos  on  the 
periodical  Theoric  mission.  The  thirty  days  which  intervened  between 
its  return  and  the  execution  of  Socrates  were  devoted  by  him,  in  un 
disturbed  repose,  to  poetic  attempts  (the  first  he  had  made  in  his  life), 
and  he  is  said  to  have  composed  a  hymn  in  honor  of  Apollo  and  Diana, 
and  to  have  versified  a  fable  of  ^Esop.  He  devoted,  also,  a  portion  of  his 
time  to  his  usual  conversations  with  his  friends.  One  of  these  conver 
sations,  on  the  duty  of  obedience  to  the  laws,  Plato  has  reported  in  the 
Crito,  so  called  after  the  faithful  follower  of  Socrates,  who  had  endeav 
ored  without  success  to  persuade  him  to  make  his  escape.  In  another, 
imitated  or  worked  up  by  Plato,  in  his  Phtedo,  Socrates,  immediately  be 
fore  he  drank  the  fatal  cup,  developed  the  grounds  of  his  immovable  con 
viction  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  He  died  with  composure  and 
cheerfulness,  in  his  seventieth  year,  B.C.  399. 

The  philosophical  merits  of  Socrates  are  of  the  highest  order.  The 
mere  fact  that  he  is  made  the  chief  interlocutor  in  those  wonderful  dia 
logues,  which  contain  the  whole  system  of  Plato,  is  sufficient  to  prove 
that  he  exerted  no  slight  influence  on  that  great  philosopher,  and  though 
he  never  committed  any  of  his  own  thoughts  to  writing,  he  has  left  indis 
putable  traces  of  the  important  innovations  in  science,  of  which  he  must 
be  considered  as  the  real  and  first  author.  We  have  three  authorities 
for  the  doctrines  of  Socrates,  namely,  Xenophon's  "  Memorabilia,"  the 
"  Dialogues"  of  Plato,  and  the  strictures  of  Aristotle.  With  regard  to 
the  first  work,  we  have  already  expressed  the  opinion  that  it  is  to  be 
viewed  merely  as  a  practical  treatise,  not  as  a  full  exposition  of  the  phi 
losophy  of  Socrates.  As  to  Plato,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  never 
meant  to  pass  off  as  his  own  the  doctrines  and  speculations  which  he  puts 
into  the  mouth  of  Socrates  ;  but  we  can  not  help  feeling  that  the  Socrates 
whom  he  represents  with  such  dramatic  truth  must  have  been  a  real  per 
son,  and  no  creature  of  the  imagination,  and  that  Socrates  must  have 
been  the  philosophical  as  he  is  the  formal  basis  of  all  that  Plato  has  done 
for  science.  If,  then,  we  seek  to  make  up  for  the  deficiencies  of  Plato 
and  Xenophon  as  exponents  of  the  doctrines  which  their  master  actually 
promulgated,  by  turning  to  the  criticisms  of  Aristotle,  we  shall  find  that 
Plato  gives  us  a  much  truer  conception  of  what  he  effected  by  his  scien 
tific  labors  than  we  could  have  derived  from  Xenophon.  Aristotle  dis 
tinctly  tells  us  that  Socrates  philosophized  about  virtue,  and  made  some 
real  discoveries  with  regard  to  the  first  principles  of  science.  Now  this 
is  just  the  philosophical  basis  which  we  discern  in  the  Socrates  of  Plato.1 

We  find  Socrates,  as  depicted  to  us  by  Plato,  always  endeavoring  to 
reduce  things  to  their  first  elements,  stripping  realities  of  their  pompous 
garb  of  words,  and  striving  to  arrive  at  certainty  as  the  standard  of 
1  Penny  Cyclop,,  xxii.,  p,  183, 


304  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

truth ;  and  we  also  find  that  his  philosophy  is  generally  applied  to  ethics 
rather  than  to  physics.  Socrates,  indeed,  was  the  first  who  turned  his 
thoughts  and  discussions  to  the  subject  of  ethics,  and  was  the  first  to 
proclaim  that  "  the  proper  study  of  mankind  is  man."  With  the  philoso 
phers  who  preceded  him,  the  subject  of  examination  had  been  Nature,  or 
the  Cosmos,  as  one  undistinguishable  whole,  blending  together  cosmogo 
ny,  astronomy,  geometry,  physics,  metaphysics,  and  other  similar  topics. 
Socrates,  on  the  other  hand,  appears  to  have  been  convinced  of  the  unity 
of  virtue,  and  to  have  believed  that  it  was  teachable  as  a  matter  of  sci 
ence.  In  fact,  with  him  the  scientific  and  the  moral  run  into  one  anoth 
er,  for  knowledge  is  the  final  cause  of  the  will,  and  good  is  the  final  cause 
of  knowledge  ;  hence  he  who  knows  what  justice  is  must  needs  be  just, 
since  no  one  wittingly  departs  from  that  which  he  knows  to  be  good.1 

Socrates  considered  it  to  be  his  particular  vocation  to  arouse  the  idea 
of  science  in  the  minds  of  men.  This  is  clear  from  the  manner  in  which 
he  is  said  to  have  insisted  upon  the  consciousness  of  ignorance^  and  also 
of  the  use  which  he  made  of  the  Delphian  response,  yvS>Qi  o-eavrdv,  "Know 
thyself."  '.'For,"  says  Schleiermacher  (in  his  valuable  paper  on  the 
"  Worth  of  Socrates  as  a  Philosopher"),  "  if  he  went  about  in  the  service 
of  the  god,  to  justify  the  celebrated  oracle,  it  is  impossible  that  the  ut 
most  point  he  reached  could  have  been  simply  to  know  that  he  knew 
nothing ;  there  was  a  step  beyond  this  which  he  must  have  taken,  that 
of  knowing  what  knowledge  is.  For  by  what  other  means  could  he  have 
been  enabled  to  declare  that,  which  others  believed  themselves  to  know, 
to  be  no  knowledge,  than  by  a  more  correct  conception  of  knowledge,  and 
by  a  more  correct  method  founded  upon  that  conception  1"  In  all  the  iso 
lated  particulars  which  are  recorded  of  Socrates,  this  one  object  is  every 
where  discernible.  His  antagonistic  opposition  to  the  Sophists  is  one 
very  strong  feature  of  this.  They  professed  to  know  every  thing,  with 
out  having  the  idea  of  science,  or  knowledge  of  what  knowledge  is,  and 
as  he  had  that  idea  without  the  mass  of  acquirements  on  which  they 
prided  themselves,  he  was  naturally  their  opponent,  and  his  strife  with 
them  is  carried  on  entirely  in  this  way,  that  he  endeavors  to  nullify  the 
effects  of  their  acquired  knowledge  by  shifting  the  ground  from  the  ob 
jects  to  the  idea  of  science,  whereby  he  generally  succeeds  in  proving 
their  deficiency  in  the  one  thing  needful  to  the  philosopher.  His  irony, 
as  it  is  called,  is  another  remarkable  proof  of  his  devotion  to  his  vocation 
as  an  awakener  of  the  idea  of  science.  The  irony  of  Socrates  has  been 
well  described  as  the  co-existence  of  the  idea  of  science  in  him,  with  the 
want  of  clear  and  complete  views  on  any  objects  of  science — in  a  word, 
as  the  knowledge  of  his  ignorance.  With  this  is  intimately  connected 
the  indirect  dialogical  method  which  he  invariably  adopted,  and  which 
may  be  considered  as  his  method  of  extracting  scientific  truth  from  the 
mass  of  semblances  and  contradictions  by  which  it  was  surrounded.2 

His  Saifj.dvioi',  or  secret  monitor,  which  was  a  great  puzzle  to  his  con 
temporaries,  as  it  has  been  to  many  of  the  moderns,  seems  to  have  been 
little  more  than  a  name  which  he  gave  to  those  convictions  on  practical 
1  Penny  Cyclop.,  xxii.,  p.  183.  3  Ibid. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  305 

subjects  which  sprung  up  spontaneously  in  his  mind,  and  for  which  he 
could  not  find  any  satisfactory  means  of  accounting,  though  he  felt  him 
self  constrained  to  follow  in  the  course  which  they  prescribed,  as  when 
he  felt  convinced  of  the  issue  of  an  undertaking,  or  was  restrained  by 
some  secret  misgiving  from  taking  a  certain  route  on  his  retreat  from  a 
disastrous  battle.1 

Such  are  the  leading  outlines  of  the  philosophy  of  Socrates,  so  far  as 
they  are  capable  of  being  established  with  any  certainty.  The  import 
ance  of  his  doctrines  is  most  clearly  perceived  when  we  consider  them 
as  they  were  developed  and  applied  by  the  various  schools  which  ac 
knowledged  him  as  their  founder,  and  especially  as  they  were  carried 
out  by  Plato.  In  all  these  schools  we  find,  along  with  the  purely  Socratic 
element,  some  foreign  admixture,  which  constitutes  the  diagnosis  of  the 
different  systems,  and  it  is  not  a  matter  of  wonder  that  no  school  of  So 
cratic  philosophy  merely  adopted  the  principles  and  method  of  its  great 
founder.  A  thoroughly  original  man  like  Socrates  would  naturally  gather 
around  him  all  the  original  and  thinking  men  who  fell  in  his  way,  and  his 
business  was  best  done  by  making  them  all  think  for  themselves,  and 
work  by  themselves,  on  the  idea  of  science  which  he  had  awakened  in 
their  minds.  The  Socratic  impulse  being  once  communicated,  it  would 
take  a  different  direction  according  to  the  character  and  natural  bias  of 
the  subject  on  which  it  operated ;  and,  though  Socrates  may  be  consid 
ered  the  basis  of  the  whole  superstructure,  he  can  have  no  more  claim  to 
the  whole  merit  of  the  Platonic  philosophy  than  he  is  entitled  to  be  blamed 
for  the  singular  views  entertained  by  some  of  his  followers.2 

The  followers  of  Socrates  may  be  divided  into  three  classes.  The  first 
class  consists  of  such  as  were  neither  philosophers  by  profession  nor  ad 
dicted  to  the  study  of  philosophy,  but  attended  upon  Socrates  as  a  moral 
preceptor.  Among  these  were  several  young  men  of  the  first  rank  in 
Athens,  particularly  Alcibiades  and  Critias.  In  this  class  may  also  be 
placed  the  poet  Euripides  and  the  orator  Isocrates.  The  second  class  in 
cluded  all  those  who,  after  his  death,  became  founders  of  particular  sects  ; 
and,  though  they  differed  from  each  other  greatly,  were  united  under  the 
general  appellation  of  Socratic  philosophers.  These  were  Aristippus, 
the  founder,  as  he  is  called,  of  the  Cyrenaic  sect ;  Phadon,  of  the  Eliac  ; 
Euclides,  of  the  Megaric  ;  Plato,  of  the  Academic  ;  and  Antisthenes,  of  the 
Cynic.  The  third  class  comprehends  those  disciples  of  Socrates  who, 
though  their  names  are  found  in  the  catalogue  of  philosophers,  did  not 
institute  any  new  sect.  Among  these,  the  most  distinguished  were  Xen- 
ophon,  Mschines,  Simon,  and  Cebes.3  Xenophon  has  already  been  men 
tioned  under  the  head  of  the  historical  writers.  We  will  give  brief 
sketches  of  the  other  three. 

1.  ^ESCHINES  (AtVx^s),*  the  namesake  of  the  orator,  and  commonly 
called  in  literary  history,  for  distinction'  sake,  JEschines  Socr aliens,  "JEs- 


1  Lelut,  Du  Demon  de  Socrate,  &c.,  Paris,  1836,  ranks  the  belief  which  Socrates  enter- 
tained  respecting  a  divine  and  secret  monitor  under  the  head  of  mental  hallucination. 

2  Penny  Cyclop.,  xxii.,  p.  184.  3  Enjieltfs  History  of  Philosophy,  vol.  i.,  p..l86w 
*  Smith,  Diet.  Bwgr.,  s.  v. 


306  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

chines  the  Socratic,"  was  an  Athenian  of  low  birth,  son  of  a  sausage- 
seller,1  and  a  disciple,  although  hy  some  of  his  contemporaries  held  an 
unworthy  one,  of  Socrates.  From  the  account  of  Diogenes  Laertius,  he 
appears  to  have  been  the  familiar  friend  of  his  great  master,  who  said 
that  "the  sausage-seller's  son  alone  knew  how  to  honor  him."  The 
same  writer  has  preserved  a  tradition  that  it  was  ^Eschines,  and  not  Crito, 
who  offered  to  assist  Socrates  in  his  escape  from  prison.  The  greater 
part  of  his  life  was  spent  in  abject  poverty,  which  gave  rise  to  the  advice 
of  Socrates  to  him,  "  to  borrow  money  of  himself  by  diminishing  his  daily 
wants."  After  the  death  of  his  master,  according  to  the  charge  of  Lysi- 
as,2  he  kept  a  perfumer's  shop  with  borrowed  money,  and,  soon  becoming 
bankrupt,  was  obliged  to  leave  Athens.  Whether  from  necessity  or  in 
clination,  he  followed  the  fashion  of  the  day,  and  retired  to  the  Syracusan 
court,  where  the  friendship  of  Aristippus  might  console  him  for  the  con 
tempt  of  Plato.  He  remained  there  until  the  expulsion  of  the  younger 
Dionysius,  and,  on  his  return,  finding  it  useless  to  attempt  a  rivalry  with 
his  great  contemporaries,  he  gave  private  lectures.  One  of  the  charges 
which  his  opponents  delighted  to  repeat,  and  which,  by  association  of 
ideas,  constituted  him  a  sophist  in  the  eyes  of  Plato  and  his  followers, 
was  that  of  receiving  money  for  his  instructions.  Another  story  was 
invented  that  the  dialogues  published  by  him  were  really  the  work  of 
Socrates ;  and  Aristippus,  either  from  joke  or  malice,  publicly  charged 
JEschines  with  the  theft  while  he  was  reading  them  at  Megara.  Plato 
is  related  by  Hegesander3  to  have  stolen  from  him  his  solitary  pupil  Xe- 
nocrates. 

The  dialogues  attributed  to  ^Eschines,*  whiqfc  bore  the  stamp  of  the 
Socratic  method,  were  seven,  according  to  Diogenes  Laertius ;  namely, 
Alcibiades,  Axiochus,  Aspasia,'  Callias,  Miltiades,  Rhinon,  and  Telauges. 
Lucian  says  that  JEschines  got  into  the  favor  of  Dionysius  by  reading  to 
him  his  Miltiades  (according  to  Diogenes,  the  worst  of  the  seven),  and 
that  thenceforth  he  became  one  of  his  parasites,  and  forgot  all  the  pre 
cepts  of  Socrates.  But  no  critic  takes  Lucian's  anecdotes  for  more  than 
he  intended  them  to  be  taken  ;  and  here  his  business  is  not  to  write  bi 
ography.  There  are  now  extant,  under  the  name  of  JEschines,  three 
dialogues,  respectively  entitled,  "  On  Virtue,  whether  it  can  be  an  Ob 
ject  of  Instruction"  (Uepl  'Aperys,  ei  SiSa/crJi/) ;  "  Eryxias,  or,  on  Wealth" 
('Epvtfas,  3)  Trepl  FIAouTou) ;  and  "  Axiochus,  or,  on  Death"  ('A|foxos,  t)  irepl 
Qavdrov).  These  dialogues  are  not  without  merit  as  respects  the  lan 
guage,  though  it  savors  of  the  late  rhetorical  school ;  but  the  best  critics 
do  not  allow  them  to  be  genuine.  JEschines  was  one  of  those  followers 
of  Socrates  who  did  not  aim  at  founding  a  sect.  We  can  not  collect  that 
he  professed  to  do  more  than  to  expound  his  master's  doctrine,  a  circum 
stance  which  would  increase  the  value  of  any  genuine  fragment  of  his 
writings.  The  Axiochus  is  mentioned  by  several  ancient  writers,  and 
particularly  by  Athenseus,5  in  such  terms  as  to  show  that  it  can  hardly 
be  the  dialogue  now  extant  under  that  name.  Hermogenes  considers 

'  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  60.         =  Ap.  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  611,  E,  F.          3  Ibid.,  xi.,  p.  507,  C. 
*  Diet.  Biogr.  Soc.  Usef.  KnowL.  vol.  i..  p.  406.  *  A  then.,  p.  220,  ed.  Casavb. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  307 

^Eschines  superior  to  Xenophon  in  elegance  and  purity  of  style.  There 
is  a  fragment  of  the  Aspasia  in  Cicero,1  part  of  which  is  quoted  from 
Cicero  by  Quintilian.3 

The  three  extant  dialogues  attributed  to  ^Eschines  appear  in  almost  all  the  editions  of 
Plato.  They  were  edited  separately  by  Fischer,  Leipzig,  1753, 1766, 1786, 1788,  the  third 
and  fourth  editions  of  which  are  the  best,  containing  the  Testimonia  Veterum,  the  criti 
cisms  of  Wolf,  and  the  Fragments.  The  Eryxias  and  Aonochus  are  also  in  Bockh's  edition 
of  Simon  Socraticus  (Simonis  Socratici,  ut  videtur,  dialogi  iv.,  &c.),  Heidelberg,  1810,  8vo. 
There  is  extant  a  letter  attributed  to  ^Eschines  in  the  collection  of  Orelli,  Leipzig,  1815. 

2.  SIMON  (2i,ua>i/)3  was  a  native  of  Athens,  a  disciple  of  Socrates,  and 
by  trade  a  leather-cutter  (O-KUTOT^UOS),  which  is  usually  Latinized  coriarius. 
Socrates  was  accustomed  to  visit  his  shop  and  converse  with  him  on  va 
rious  subjects.    These  conversations  Simon  afterward  committed  to  writ 
ing,  as  far  as  he  could  remember  them  ;  and  he  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  who  recorded,  in  the  form  of  conversations,  the  words  of  Socrates. 
His  philosophical  turn  attracted  the  notice  of  Pericles,  who  offered  to  pro 
vide  for  his  maintenance  if  he  would  come  and  reside  with  him ;  but 
Simon  refused,  on  the  ground  that  he  did  not  wish  to  surrender  his  inde 
pendence.     The  favorable  notice  of  such  a  man  as  Pericles  may  be  con 
sidered  as  overbalancing  the  unfavorable  or  sneering  judgment  of  those 
who  characterized  his  Dialogues  as  "  leathern."     He  reported  thirty-three 
conversations,  Aid\oyoi,  Dialogi,  which  were  contained  in  one  volume. 
Diogenes  Laertius,4  from  wThom  we  derive  our  knowledge  of  Simon,  enu 
merates  the  subjects,  the  variety  of  which  shows  the  activity  and  versa 
tility  of  Simon's  mind.     The  twelfth  of  the  so-called  Socratis  et  Socratico- 
rum  EpistolcB  is  written  in  the  name  of  Simon,  and  professes  to  be  ad 
dressed  to  Aristippus.     ""he  concluding  passage  of  it  is  cited  by  Stobaeus. 
Bockh  has  given  an  edition  of  four  spurious  Platonic  dialogues,  ascribed 
to  Simon  (Simonis  Socratici,  ut  videtur,  dialogi  iv.,  &c.),  Heidelberg,  1810, 
8vo,  but  the  genuine  dialogues  are  lost. 

3.  CEDES  (KejSrjs),5  a  native  of  Thebes,  was  also  a  disciple  of  Socrates, 
and  connected  with  him  by  the  ties  of  intimate  friendship.6    He  is  intro 
duced  by  Plato  as  one  of  the  interlocutors  in  the  Phaedon,  and  as  having 
been  present  at  the  death  of  Socrates.7    He  is  said  at  the  advice  of  Soc 
rates  to  have  purchased  Phaedon,  who  had  been  a  slave,  and  to  have  in 
structed  him  in  philosophy.8    Diogenes  Laertius  and  Suidas  ascribe  to 
him  three  works,  namely,  ILVa£,  'E/38<fya7,  and  *pwi%os.     The  last  two  are 
lost,  but  the  ILVa£  is  still  extant,  and  is  referred  to  by  several  ancient  writ 
ers.     This  rhW|  is  a  philosophical  explanation  of  a  tablet,  on  which  the 
whole  of  human  life,  with  its  dangers  and  temptations,  was  symbolically 
represented,  and  which  is  said  to  have  been  dedicated  by  some  one  in  the 
temple  of  Saturn  at  Athens  or  Thebes.     The  author  introduces  some 
youths  contemplating  the  tablet,  and  an  old  man  who  steps  among  them 
undertakes  to  explain  its  meaning.     The  whole  drift  of  the  little  book  is 
to  show  that  only  the  proper  development  of  our  mind  and  the  possession 

1  J)e  Invent.,  i.,  31.  2  Inst.  Or.,  v.,  11.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

*  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  122,  seq.  5  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

6  Xen.,  Mem.,  i.,  2,  28 ;  Plat.,  Crit.,  p.  45,  B.  '  Phad.,  p.  59,  C. 
s  Cell,  ii.,  18;  Macrob.,  Sat.,  i.,  11. 


308  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

of  real  virtues  can  make  us  truly  happy.  Suidas  calls  this  irka£  a 
cris  run  ^"AtSou,  an  explanation  which  is  not  applicable  to  the  work  now 
extant,  and  some  have  therefore  thought  that  the  iriva£  to  which  Suidas 
refers  was  a  different  work  from  the  one  which  we  possess.  This  and 
other  circumstances  have  led  some  critics  to  doubt  whether  our  iriva£  is 
the  work  of  the  Theban  Cebes,  and  to  ascribe  it  to  a  later  Cebes  of  Cyz- 
icus,  a  Stoic  philosopher  of  the  time  of  Marcus  Aurelius.1  But  the  7nVa£ 
which  is  now  extant  is  manifestly  written  in  a  Socratic  spirit  and  on  So- 
cratic  principles,  so  that,  at  any  rate,  its  author  is  much  more  likely  to 
have  been  a  Socratic  than  a  Stoic  philosopher.  There  are,  it  is  true, 
some  few  passages  (e.  g.,  c.  13)  where  persons  are  mentioned  belonging 
to  a  later  age  than  that  of  the  Theban  Cebes,  but  there  is  little  doubt  that 
this  and  a  few  similar  passages  are  interpolations  by  a  later  hand,  which 
can  not  surprise  us  in  the  case  of  a  work  of  such  popularity  as  the  iriva.% 
of  Cebes  ;  for,  owing  to  its  ethical  character,  it  was  formerly  extremely 
popular,  and  the  editions  and  translations  of  it  are  very  numerous.  The 
best  modern  editions  are  those  of  Schweighauser,  in  his  edition  of  Epi- 
ctetus,  Lips.,  1799-1800,  5  vols.  8vo  ;  and  also  separately  printed  (Stras- 
burg,  1806, 12mo),  and  of  Coraes,  in  his  edition  of  Epictetus,  Paris,  1826, 
8vo. 

The  inferior  sects  which  sprang  from  the  teachings  of  Socrates  were 
the  Cyrenaic,  the  Megaric,  and  the  Eliac  or  Eretriac.  Those  of  higher 
celebrity  were  the  Academic  and  the  Cyme,  from  which  former  sprang 
the  Peripatetic  and  the  Stoic. 

IV.     THE     CYRENAIC     SCHOOL. 

I.  The  Cyrenaic  sect  was  founded  by  Aristippus,  and  took  its  name 
from  his  native  city  Gyrene,  the  capital  of  Cyrenaica,  in  Northern  Africa. 

II.  ARISTIPPUS  ('ApiVrtTTTTos)2  was  a  native,  as  we  have  just  said,  of  the 
Greek  colony  of  Gyrene,  in  Northern  Africa,  and  belonged  to  a  rich  fam 
ily.     The  year  of  his  birth  is  unknown,  but  his  period  is  sufficiently  fixed 
by  the  fact  that  he  came  to  Athens  when  a  young  man  to  listen  to  Socra 
tes,3  and  was  one  of  his  hearers  till  his  death.     Aristippus,  it  is  said,  was 
in  the  island  of  JEgina  at  the  time  when  Socrates  was  executed  :  he  was 
certainly  not  present  on  the  occasion,  as  we  learn  from  the  Phaedon  of 
Plato.     It  is,  however,  rather  difficult  to  give  so  much  significance  to  the 
words  of  Plato,  in  which  this  fact  is  barely  stated,  as  some  ancient  and 
modern  writers  have  done.     He  was  still  living  in  the  year  B.C.  366,4 
but  the  time  of  his  death  is  not  recorded. 

The  life  of  Aristippus,  by  Diogenes  Laertius,  is  very  barren  of  inform 
ation  concerning  him,  and  it  is  chiefly  filled  with  anecdotes  of  his  sharp 
sayings  and  repartees.  According  to  the  scanty  and  scattered  notices 
of  him,  he  rambled  to  various  countries,  and  was  a  visitor  at  the  court 
of  the  younger  Dionysius  of  Syracuse  at  the  same  time  with  Plato.  He 
also  visited  Asia,  where  he  fell  into  the  hands  of  Artaphernes,  the  Per 
sian  satrap  who  drove  the  Spartans  from  Rhodes.5  He  appears,  howev- 

1  Athen.,  iv.,  p.  156  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Pint.,  De  Curios.,  2. 

*  Diod.  Sic.,  xv.,  76.  5  Id.,  xiv.,  79.     Compare  Brucker,  Hist.  Crit.  Phil.,  ii.,  2,  3. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  309 

er,  to  have  returned  at  last  to  Gyrene,  and  there  to  have  spent  his  old 
age.  The  brief  notices  that  we  have  of  Aristippus  represent  him  as  a 
man  who  viewed  pleasure  as  the  object  of  life,  and  showed  by  his  exam 
ple  that  he  considered  the  enjoyments  of  sense  as  part  of  a  wise  man's 
pursuit.  He  indulged  in  the  luxuries  of  the  table,  and  frequented  the 
company  of  prostitutes.  Among  his  favorites  was  the  notorious  Lais. 
He  made  himself  as  happy  as  he  could  in  all  circumstances.  His  philos 
ophy  suited  the  views  of  Horace  in  his  maturer  age,  who  characterizes 
the  versatility  of  his  character  by  one  happy  line  ;l  and  in  another  pas 
sage2  he  represents  Aristippus  as  trying  to  subject  circumstances  to  him 
self,  and  not  submitting  to  circumstances  ;  where,  as  Wieland  observes, 
Horace  intends  to  mark  the  opposition  between  the  Cyrenaic  and  the 
Stoic  systems. 

Aristippus  is  called  the  founder  of  the  Cyrenaic  sect,  but  there  is  no 
clear  proof  that  he  left  behind  him  any  systematic  exposition  of  his  doc 
trines.  If  he  did  leave  any  written  system,  it  would  appear  to  have  at 
tracted  little  attention,  for,  as  Ritter  observes,  Aristotle  makes  no  men 
tion  of  Aristippus  in  his  Nicomachean  Ethics,  though  he  there  examines 
the  subject  of  pleasure,  and  the  various  opinions  upon  it.  Yet  he  is  said 
to  have  had  hearers,  and  he  was  the  first  of  the  Socratics  who  received 
pay  for  his  instructions,  with  which  he  is  reproached,  though  without  his 
name  being  mentioned,  by  Xenophon.  Xenophon  disliked  Aristippus,  and 
accordingly,  as  Diogenes  Laertius  observes,  he  makes  Socrates  direct  his 
discourse  on  temperance  against  him.  Aristotle  called  him  a  sophist, 
partly,  as  would  seem,  because  he  took  pay  for  his  teaching,  but  mainly 
in  reference  to  his  doctrines.  The  school  of  Aristippus  derives  its  name 
from  Gyrene,  not  simply  because  the  founder  was  born  and  perhaps 
taught  there  in  his  old  age,  but  because  his  successors  also  lived  there, 
or  in  the  neighboring  parts.  Aristippus  taught  his  daughter  Arete  and 
Antipater  of  Gyrene.  Arete  taught  her  son,  the  younger  Aristippus,  who 
is  called  the  "  Mother-taught"  (MrjrpoSiSaKTos),  and  is  said  to  have  sys 
tematized  his  grandfather's  doctrines.  Diogenes  Laertius,3  on  the  author 
ity  of  Sotion  (B.C.  205)  and  Panaetius  (B.C.  143),  gives  a  long  list  of 
books  whose  authorship  is  ascribed  to  Aristippus,  though  he  also  says 
that  Sosicrates  of  Rhodes  (B.C.  255)  states  that  he  wrote  nothing.  Among 
these  are  treatises  Tlepl  IlatSeios,  Ilepi  'Aper^s,  Hepl  Ti/x^s,  and  many  oth 
ers.  Some  epistles  attributed  to  him  are  deservedly  rejected  as  forgeries 
by  Bentley.4 

The  Cyrenaics  despised  Physics,  and  limited  their  inquiries  to  Ethics, 
though  they  included  under  that  term  a  much  wider  range  of  science 
than  can  fairly  be  reckoned  as  belonging  to  it.  So,  too,  Aristippus  neg 
lected  mathematics,  as  being  a  study  not  concerned,  in  any  way,  with 
good  and  evil  ;5  which  is  consistent  with  the  doctrines  of  Socrates,  who 
set  little  value  on  pursuits  that  had  not  a  moral  object.  They  divided 
philosophy  into  five  parts,  namely,  the  study  of  (1)  Objects  of  desire  and 
aversion;  (2)  Feelings  and  Affections ;  (3)  Actions;  (4)  Causes;  (5) 

1  Epist.,  i.,  17,  23.  2  /&.,  i.,  1, 18.  3  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  65. 

*  Dissertation  on  Phalaris,  p.  104.  5  Metaphys.,  ii.,  2. 


310 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


Proofs.     Of  these,  (4)  is  clearly  connected  with  Physics,  and  (5)  with 
Logic. 

1.  The  first  of  these  five  divisions  of  science  is  the  only  one  in  which 
the  Cyrenaic  view  is  connected  with  the  Socratic.     Socrates  considered 
happiness  (i.  e.,  the  enjoyment  of  a  well-ordered  mind)  to  he  the  aim  of 
all  men,  and  Aristippus,  taking  up  this  position,  pronounced  pleasure  the 
chief  good,  and  pain  the  chief  evil ;  in  proof  of  which  he  referred  to  the 
natural  feelings  of  men,  children,  and  animals  ;  but  he  wished  the  mind 
to  preserve  its  authority  in  the  midst  of  pleasure.     Desire  he  could  not 
admit  into  his  system,  as  it  subjects  men  to  hope  and  fear :  the  r4\os  of 
human  life  was  momentary  pleasure  (novoxpovos,  /ue/jt/dj).     For  the  pres 
ent  only  is  ours,  the  past  is  gone,  and  the  future  is  uncertain ;  present 
happiness,  therefore,  is  to  be  sought,  and  not  euSai^oj/ia,  which  is  only  the 
sum  of  a  number  of  happy  states,  just  as  he  considered  life  in  general  the 
sum  of  particular  states  of  the  soul.     In  this  point  the  Cyrenaics  were 
opposed  to  the  Epicureans.     All  pleasures  were  held  equal,  though  they 
might  admit  of  a  difference  in  the  degree  of  their  purity.     So  that  a  man 
ought  never  to  covet  more  than  he  possesses,  and  should  never  allow 
himself  to  be  overcome  by  sensual  enjoyment.     It  is  plain  that,  even 
with  these  concessions,  the  Cyrenaic  system  destroys  all  moral  unity, 
by  proposing  to  a  man  as  many  separate  TC'ATJ  as  his  life  contains  mo 
ments. 

2.  The  next  point  is  to  determine  what  is  pleasure  and  what  pain. 
Both  are  positive,  that  is,  pleasure  is  not  the  gratification  of  a  want,  nor 
does  the  absence  of  pleasure  equal  pain.     The  absence  of  either  is  a  mere 
negative  inactive  state,  and  both  pleasure  and  pain  are  motions  of  the 
soul  (tv  KivhfftC).     Pain^was  defined  to  be  a  violent,  pleasure  a  moderate 
motion,  the  first  being  compared  to  the  sea  in  a  storm,  the  second  to  the 
sea  under  a  light  breeze,  the  intermediate  state  of  no-pleasure  and  no- 
pain  to  a  calm,  a  simile  not  quite  apposite,  since  a  calm  is  not  the  mid 
dle  state  between  a  storm  and  a  gentle  breeze.     In  this  denial  of  pleasure 
as  a  state  of  rest  we  find  Aristippus  again  opposed  to  Epicurus. 

3.  Actions  are  in  themselves  morally  indifferent,  the  only  question  for 
us  to  consider  being  their  result ;  and  law  and  custom  are  the  only  au 
thorities  which  make  an  action  good  or  bad.     This  monstrous  dogma 
was  a  little  qualified  by  the  statement  that  the  advantages  of  injustice  are 
slight. 

4.  There  is  no  universality  in  human  conceptions  ;  the  senses  are  the 
only  avenues  of  knowledge,  and  even  these  admit  a  very  limited  range 
of  information.     For  the  Cyrenaics  said  that  men  could  agree  neither  in 
judgments  nor  notions,  in  nothing,  in  fact,  but  names.     We  have  all  cer 
tain  sensations,  which  we  call  white  or  sweet,  but  whether  the  sensation 
which  A  calls  white  is  similar  to  that  which  B  calls  by  that  name,  we  can 
not  tell ;  for  by  the  common  term  white  every  man  denotes  a  distinct  ob 
ject.     Of  the  causes  which  produce  these  sensations  we  are  quite  igno 
rant  ;  and  from  all  this  we  come  to  the  doctrine  of  modern  philological 
metaphysics,  that  truth  is  what  each  man  troweth.     All  states  of  mind 
are  motions  ;  nothing  exists  but  states  of  mind,  and  they  are  not  the  same 


ATTIC      PERIOD. 


311 


to  all  men.     True  wisdom  consists,  therefore,  in  transforming  disagree 
able  into  agreeable  sensations. 

5.  As  to  the  Cyrenaic  doctrine  of  proofs  no  evidence  remains.  In 
many  of  these  opinions  we  recognize  the  happy,  careless,  selfish  disposi 
tion  which  characterized  their  author ;  and  th  >  system  resembles  in  most 
points  those  of  Heraclitus  and  Protagoras,  as  given  in  Plato's  Theaetetus. 
The  doctrines  that  a  subject  only  knows  objects  through  the  prism  of  the 
impressions  which  he  receives,  and  that  man  is  the  measure  of  all  things, 
are  stated  or  implied  in  the  Cyrenaic  system,  and  lead  at  once  to  the 
consequence  that  what  we  call  reality  is  appearance  ;  so  that  the  whole 
fabric  of  human  knowledge  becomes  a  fantastic  picture.  The  principle 
on  which  all  this  rests,  namely,  that  knowledge  is  sensation,  is  the  foun 
dation  of  Locke's  modern  ideology,  though  he  did  not  perceive  its  con 
nection  with  the  consequences  to  which  it  led  the  Cyrenaics.  To  revive 
these  was  reserved  for  Hume.1 

V.     THE     MEGARIC     SCHOOL. 

I.  The  Megaric  sect  was  instituted  by  EUCLIBES  (EvK\dSrjs)  of  Megara, 
and  took  its  name  from  the  place  which  gave  birth  to  its  founder.     From 
its  disputatious  character,  it  also  received  the  appellation  of  Eristic  ('Epiff- 
riicfi,  from  tytfav,  "  to  contend") ;  and  it  was  likewise  termed  the  Dialectic, 
not  because  it  gave  rise  to  dialectics  or  logical  debates,  which  had  before 
this  time  exercised  the  ingenuity  of  philosophers,  particularly  in  the  Ele- 
atic  school,  but  because  the  discourses  and  writings  of  this  class  of  phi 
losophers  commonly  took  the  form  of  a  dialogue. 

II.  EucLiDEs2  was  a  native  of  Megara,  the  capital  of  the  district  of  Meg- 
aris.     According  to  some  less  probable  accounts,  he  was  born  at  Gela,  in 
Sicily.     He  was  one  of  the  chief  disciples  of  Socrates,  but,  before  becom 
ing  such,  he  had  studied  the  doctrines,  and  especially  the  dialectics  of  the 
Eleatics.     Socrates  on  one  occasion  reproved  him  for  his  fondness  for 
subtle  and  captious  disputes.3     On  the  death  of  Socrates,  Euclides,  with 
most  of  the  other  pupils  of  that  philosopher,  took  refuge  in  Megara,  and 
there  established  a  school  which  distinguished  itself  by  the  cultivation  of 
dialectics.     The  doctrines  of  the  Eleatics  formed  the  basis  of  his  philo 
sophical  system.     With  these  he  blended  the  ethical  and  dialectical  prin 
ciples  of  Socrates.     The  Eleatic  dogma,  that  there  is  one  universal,  un 
changeable  existence,  he  viewed  in  a  moral  aspect,  calling  this  one  ex 
istence  the  Good,  but  giving  it  also  other  names  (as  Reason,  Intelligence, 
&c.),  perhaps  for  the  purpose  of  explaining  how  the  real,  though  one,  ap 
peared  to  be  many.     He  rejected  demonstration,  attacking  not  so  much 
the  premises  assumed  as  the  conclusions  drawn,  and  also  reasoning  from 
analogy.     He  is  said  to  have  been  a  man  of  a  somewhat  indolent  and  pro 
crastinating  disposition.     Euclides  was  the  author  of  six  dialogues,  no 
one  of  which,  however,  has  come  down  to  us.     He  has  frequently  been 
erroneously  confounded  with  the  mathematician  of  the  same  name. 

Euclides  introduced  new  subtleties  into  the  art  of  disputation,  several 
of  which,  though  often  mentioned  as  examples  of  great  ingenuity,  deserve 

1  Xmith.  Diet.  Piogr.,  s.  v.  '2  Id.  ib.  3   Diog.  Laert.,  ih,  30. 


312 


GREEK     L  I T  E  R  A  T  U  R  E. 


only  to  be  remembered  as  proofs  of  egregious  trifling.  Of  these  sophist 
ical  modes  of  reasoning,  called  by  Aristotle  Eristic  syllogisms,  a  few  ex 
amples  may  suffice.  1.  The  Lying  sophism  :  If,  \vhen  you  speak  the 
truth,  you  say,  you  lie,  you  lie  :  but  you  say  you  lie,  when  you  speak  the 
truth  ;  therefore,  in  speaking  the  truth,  you  lie.  2.  The  Occult  :  Do  you 
know  your  father  1  Yes.  Do  you  know  this  man  who  is  veiled  1  No. 
Then  you  do  not  know  your  father,  for  it  is  your  father  who  is  veiled. 
3.  The  Sorties  :  Is  one  grain  a  heap  1  No.  Two  grains  1  No.  Three 
grains  ?  No.  Go  on,  adding  one  by  one  ;  and,  if  one  grain  be  not  a 
heap,  it  will  be  impossible  to  say  what  number  of  grains  make  a  heap. 
In  such  high  repute  were  these  silly  inventions  for  perplexing  plain  truth, 
that  Chrysippus  wrote  six  books  upon  the  first  of  these  sophisms  ;  and 
Philetas,  a  Coan,  died  of  consumption,  which  he  had  contracted  by  the 
close  study  that  he  had  bestowed  upon  it. 

III.  The  only  other  member  of  the  Megaric  school  deserving  of  being 
mentioned  here  is  STILPON  (2,Ti\Tv<av\l  also  a  native  of  Megara.  Accord 
ing  to  one  account,  he  engaged  in  dialectic  encounters  with  Diodorus, 
nicknamed  Cronus,  at  the  court  of  Ptolemy  Soter  ;  while,  according  to 
another,  he  did  not  comply  with  the  invitation  of  the  king  to  visit  Alex- 
andrea.  He  acquired  great  reputation,  and  so  high  was  the  esteem  in 
which  he  was  held,  that  Demetrius,  the  son  of  Antigonus,  spared  his 
house  at  the  capture  of  Megara.  He  is  said  to  have  surpassed  all  his 
contemporaries  in  inventive  power  and  dialectic  art,  and  to  have  inspired 
almost  all  Greece  with  a  devotion  to  the  Megaric  philosophy.  A  number 
of  distinguished  men,  too,  are  named,  whom  he  is  said  to  have  drawn 
away  from  Aristotle,  Theophrastus,  and  others,  and  attached  to  himself; 
among  others,  Crates  the  Cynic,  and  Zeno,  the  founder  of  the  Stoic 
school.  Not  less  commendation  is  bestowed  upon  his  political  wisdom, 
his  simple,  straightforward  disposition,  and  the  equanimity  with  which 
he  endured  the  fate  of  being  the  father  of  a  degenerate  daughter.  Of  the 
nine  dialogues  which  were  ascribed  to  him,  and  which  are  said  to  have 
been  of  a  somewhat  frigid  kind,  we  learn  only  the  titles,  two  of  which 
seem  to  point  to  a  polemical  disquisition  on  Aristippus  and  Aristotle.  In 
like  manner,  we  obtain  exceedingly  scanty  disclosures  respecting  his  doc 
trines  in  the  few  propositions  and  sayings  of  his  which  are  quoted,  torn 
as  they  are  from  their  connection.  Only  we  can  scarcely  fail  to  recog 
nize  in  them  the  direction  which  the  Megaric  philosophy  took,  to  demon 
strate  that  the  phenomenal  world  is  unapproachable  to  true  knowledge. 
He  seems,  however,  especially  to  have  made  the  idea  of  virtue  the  ob 
ject  of  his  consideration,  and  to  have  placed  in  a  prominent  point  of  view 
the  self-sufficiency  of  it.  He  maintained  that  the  wise  man  ought  not 
only  to  overcome  every  evil,  but  not  even  to  be  affected  by  any,  not  even 
to  feel  it. 

VI.    THE     ELIAC     AND     ERETRIAC     SCHOOL. 


I.  The  Eliac  school  is  represented  by  PH^EDON  (Qaillvv),*  a  native  of 
Elis.     He  was  ofjiigh  birth  ;  but  was  taken  prisoner  in  his  youth,  and 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  ».  v.  2  Id.  ib. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  313 

became  a  slave  at  Athens.  According  to  Diogenes  Laertius,  he  ran  away 
from  his  master  to  Socrates,  and  was  ransomed  by  one  of  the  friends  of 
the  latter.1  Phaedon  then  attached  himself  to  Socrates,  and  was  present 
at  the  death  of  the  philosopher  while  yet  quite  a  youth.2  He  appears  to 
have  lived  in  Athens  some  time  after  the  death  of  Socrates,  and  then 
returned  to  Elis,  where  he  became  the  founder  of  a  school  of  philosophy.3 
He  was  succeeded  by  Plistanus,4  after  whom  the  Eliac  school  was  merged 
in  the  Eretriac,  by  Menedemus.  Of  the  doctrines  of  Phaedon  nothing  is 
known,  except  as  they  made  their  appearance  in  the  philosophy  of  Mene 
demus.  None  of  his  writings  have  come  down  to  us.  They  were  in  the 
form  of  dialogues.  The  celebrated  dialogue  of  Plato  on  the  immortality 
of  the  soul  is  named  after  Phsedon. 

II.  MENEDEMUS  (Mcj/e'Srj^os),5  a  native  of  Eretria,  though  of  noble  birth, 
was  poor,  and  worked  for  a  livelihood  either  as  a  builder  or  a  tent-maker. 
According  to  one  story,  he  seized  the  opportunity  afforded  by  his  being 
sent  on  some  military  service  to  Megara  to  hear  Plato,  and  abandoned 
the  army  to  addict  himself  to  philosophy  ;  but  it  may  be  questioned 
whether  he  was  old  enough  to  have  heard  Plato  before  the  death  of  the 
latter.  According  to  another  story,  he  and  his  friend  Asclepiades  got 
their  livelihood  as  millers,6  working  during  the  night  that  they  might 
have  leisure  for  philosophy  during  the  day.  The  two  friends  afterward 
became  disciples  of  Stilpon  at  Megara.  From  Megara  they  went  to  Elis, 
and  placed  themselves  under  the  instruction  of  some  disciples  of  Pheedon. 
On  his  return  to  Eretria,  Menedemus  established  a  school  of  philosophy, 
which  was  called  the  Eretriac.  He  did  not,  however,  confine  himself  to 
philosophical  pursuits,  but  took  an  active  part  in  the  political  affairs  of 
his  native  city,  and  came  to  be  the  leading  man  in  the  state.  He  went 
on  various  embassies  to  Lysimachus,  Demetrius,  and  others ;  but,  being 
suspected  of  the  treacherous  intention  of  betraying  Eretria  into  the  hands 
of  Antigonus,  he  quitted  his  native  city  secretly,  and  took  refuge  with 
Antigonus  in  Asia.  Here  he  starved  himself  to  death,  in  the  seventy- 
fourth  year  of  his  age,  probably  about  B.C.  277. 

Of  the  philosophy  of  Menedemus  little  is  known,  except  that  it  closely 
resembled  that  of  the  Megaric  school.  Its  leading  feature  was  the  dogma 
of  the  oneness  of  the  Good,  which  he  carefully  distinguished  from  the 
Useful.  All  distinctions  between  virtues  he  regarded  as  merely  nominal. 
The  Good  and  the  True  he  looked  upon  as  identical.  In  dialectics,  he 
rejected  all  merely  negative  propositions,  maintaining  that  truth  could  be 
predicated  only  of  those  which  were  affirmative,  and  of  these  he  admitted 
only  such  as  were  identical  propositions.  He  was  a  keen  and  vehement 
disputant,  frequently  arguing,  if  we  may  believe  Antigonus  Carystius,  as 
quoted  by  Diogenes  Laertius,  till  he  was  black  in  the  face.  He  never 
committed  any  of  his  doctrines  to  writing. 

i  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  105.  2  piat^  Phaed,,  c.  38.  3  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  126. 

*  Id,,  ii.,  105.  s  smith,  Diet.,  s.  v.  «  Athm.,  iv.,  p.  168. 

o 


314 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


VII.     THE     ACADEMIC     SCHOOL. 


I.  The  Academic  school,  or  Academy,  as  it  is  more  familiarly  termed, 
derived  its  name  from  the  Academia  ('A/caS^m),  a  public  grove  or  garden 
in  the  suburbs  of  Athens,  where  Plato  established  his  school. 

II.  The  Academy  was  divided  into  the  Old,  the  Middle,  and  the  New. 
The  Old  Academy  consisted  of  those  followers  of  Plato  who  taught  the 
doctrines  of  their  master  without  admixture  or  corruption.     The  Middle 
Academy  commenced  with  Arcesilaus  or  Arcesilas,  and  brought  in  the 
skeptical  doctrine  of  uncertainty ;  in  other  words,  it  taught  that  every 
thing  is  uncertain  to  the  human  understanding,  and  that  all  confident  as 
sertions  are  unreasonable,  and  to  be  avoided.     The  New  Academy  was 
established  by  Carneades,  who  introduced  what  has  been  termed  the  doc 
trine  of  probabilities ;  namely,  that  although  the  senses,  the  understand 
ing,  and  the  imagination  frequently  deceive  us,  and  therefore  can  not  be 
infallible  judges  of  truth,  still  that,  from  the  impressions  which  we  per 
ceive  to  be  produced  on  the  mind  by  means  of  the  senses,  we  infer  ap 
pearances,  of  truth,  or  probabilities.     We  will  now  give  a  sketch  of  the 
philosophers  of  the  Old  Academy,  reserving  the  Middle  and  the  New 
Academy  for  the  Alexandrine  and  Roman  periods  respectively. 

OLD     ACADEMY. 

I.  PLATO  (rTAarcoj/),1  the  celebrated  founder  of  the  Old  Academy,  was 
born,  according  to  the  most  consistent  accounts,  in  B.C.  429.  His  father 
was  Ariston,  the  son  of  Aristocles,  and  Plato  is  said  to  have  been  origin 
ally  called  Aristocles,  after  his  grandfather,  according  to  a  custom  very 
common  among  the  Greeks.  The  old  anecdote-collectors  have  thought 
it  necessary  to  find  some  explanation  of  the  second  name,  by  which  he  is 
now  known,  as,  for  instance,  that  he  was  so  called  from  the  breadth  of 
his  style  (8ia  r^jv  Tr\arvrr}ra  TTJS  ep^Tjj/e/as),  or  from  his  expansive  forehead 
C&ri  TrXarbs  ^v  rb  juerwTiw)  ;2  but  this  seems  quite  idle,  as  the  name  Plato 
was  of  common  occurrence  among  the  Athenians  of  that  time.'  The  phi 
losopher's  mother  was  Perictione,  to  whom  later  writers  attribute  a  lineal 
descent  from  Execestides,  the  father  of  Solon.  As  might  have  been  ex 
pected  from  the  high  standing  of  his  family,  Plato  received  the  best  edu 
cation  that  Athens  could  furnish.  He  was  even  sufficiently  skilled  in 
wrestling  to  contend  at  the  Pythian  and  Isthmian  games ;  and  his  first 
literary  attempts,  namely,  the  composition  of  dithyrambic,  lyric,  and  tragic 
poems,  showed  that  he  had  profited  by  the  instructions  of  his  teachers  in 
music  and  literature.  He  is  also  said  to  have  applied  himself  to  painting. 

Plato's  connection  with  Socrates  is  said  to  have  commenced  in  B.C. 
410.  He  had  previously  become  acquainted,  through  Cratylus,  with  the 
doctrines  of  Heraclitus,3  and  through  other  instructors,  or  by  means  of 
writings,  with  the  philosophical  dogmas  of  the  Eleatics  and  of  Anaxago- 
ras.  The  intimacy  of  the  relation  between  Socrates  and  himself  is  at 
tested,  better  than  by  hearsay  accounts  and  insufficient  testimonies,  by 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  i>.  2  Diog.  Larrt.,  iii..  4  ;   Vita  Platonis,  p.  6,  B. 

3  Aristot.,  Metapli.,  i.,  fi. 


ATTIC      PERIOD.  315 

the  enthusiastic  love  with  which  Plato  not  only  exhibits  Socrates  as  he 
lived  and  died — in  the  Banquet  and  Phaedon — but  also  glorifies  him  by 
making  him  the  leader  of  the  investigations  in  the  greater  part  of  his  di 
alogues  ;  not  as  though  he  had  thought  himself  secure  of  the  assent  of 
Socrates  to  all  the  conclusions  and  developments  which  he  had  himself 
drawn  from  the  few  though  pregnant  principles  of  his  teacher,  but  in  order 
to  express  his  conviction  that  he  had  organically  developed  the  results 
involved  in  the  Socratic  doctrine.  It  is  therefore  probable  enough  that, 
as  Plutarch1  relates,  at  the  close  of  his  life  he  praised  that  dispensation 
which  had  made  him  a  contemporary  of  Socrates.  At  the  death  of  the 
latter,  he  betook  himself,  with  others  of  the  Socratics,  as  Hermogenes 
had  related,  in  order  to  avoid  threatened  persecutions,2  to  Euclides,  at 
Megara,  who,  of  all  his  contemporaries,  had  the  nearest  mental  affinity 
with  him.  That  Plato,  during  his  residence  in  Megara,  composed  several 
of  his  dialogues,  especially  those  of  a  dialectical  character,  is  probable 
enough,  though  there  is  no  direct  evidence  on  the  subject.3 

Friendship  for  the  mathematician  Theodoras  (though  this,  indeed,  does 
not  manifest  itself  in  the  way  in  which  the  latter  is  introduced  in  the 
Theaetetus)  is  said  to  have  led  Plato  next  to  Gyrene.4  Through  his  ea 
gerness  for  knowledge,  he  is  said  to  have  been  induced  to  visit  Egypt, 
Sicily,  and  the  Greek  cities  in  Lower  Italy.5  Others,  however,  in  invert 
ed  order,  make  him  travel  first  to  Sicily  and  then  to  Egypt,6  or  from  Sic 
ily  to  Cyrene  and  Egypt,  and  then  again  to  Sicily.  As  his  companion, 
we  find  mentioned  Eudoxus,7  or  Simmias,8  or  even  Euripides.  The  more 
distant  journeys  of  Plato  into  the  interior  of  Asia,  to  the  Hebrews,  Baby 
lonians,  and  Assyrians,  to  the  Magi  and  Persians,  are  mentioned  only  by 
writers  on  whom  no  reliance  can  be  placed.  That  Plato,  during  his  res 
idence  in  Sicily,  became  acquainted,  through  Dion,  with  the  elder  Diony- 
sius,  but  very  soon  fell  out  with  the  tyrant,  is  asserted  by  credible  wit 
nesses.  But  more  doubt  attaches  to  the  story  which  relates  that  he  was 
given  up  by  the  tyrant,  to  the  Spartan  ambassador  Pollis,  by  him  sold  into 
JEgina,  and  set  at  liberty  by  the  Cyrenean  Anniceris.  Plato  is  said  to 
have  visited  Sicily  when  forty  years  old,  consequently  in  B.C.  389. 

After  his  return,  he  began  to  teach,  partly  in  the  gymnasium  of  the 
Academia  and  its  shady  avenues,  between  the  Ceramicus  and  the  hill 
Colonus  Hippius,  partly  in  his  garden,  which  was  situated  at  Colonus.9 
Respecting  the  acquisition  of  this  garden,  and  the  circumstances  of  Plato 
as  regards  property  generally,  we  have  conflicting  accounts,  which  need 
not  here  be  examined  into.  Plato  taught  gratuitously,10  and,  agreeably 
to  his  maxims,11  without  doubt  mainly  in  the  form  of  lively  dialogue  ;  yet 
on  the  more  difficult  parts  of  his  doctrinal  system  he  probably  also  deliv 
ered  connected  lectures.  The  more  narrow  circle  of  his  disciples  (the 
number  of  them,  which  can  scarcely  have  remained  uniform,  is  stated  at 


Marius,  46.     Compare  Lactant.,  Div.  Inst.,  iii.,  19.       2  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  106  ;  iii.,  16. 
Ast,  vom  Leben,  &c.,  des  Plato,  p.  51.  *  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  6. 

Cic.,  De  Rep.,  i.,  10 ;  De  Fin.,  v.,  29.  6  Quintil,  i..  12, 15 ;  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  6. 

Strab.,  xvii.,  29.  s  phit.,  De  D&m.  Socr.,  1. 

Timon.  ap.  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  7 ;  Pint.,  De  ExiL,  c.  10,  seqq. 
1  Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  2,  »  Phad.,  p.  275  ;  Protag.,  p.  329  ;  Gorg.,  p.  449. 


316  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

twenty-eight)  assembled  themselves  in  his  garden  at  common,  simple 
meals,1  and  it  was  probably  to  them  alone  that  the  inscription,  said  to 
have  been  set  up  over  the  vestibule  of  the  house,  "  Let  no  one  enter 
who  is  unacquainted  with  geometry,"2  had  reference.  From  this  house 
came  forth  his  nephew  Speusippus,  Xenocrates  of  Chalcedon,  Aristotle, 
Heraclides  Ponticus,  Hestiseus  of  Perinthus,  Philippus  the  Opuntian,  and 
others,  men  from  the  most  distant  parts  of  Greece.  To  the  wider  circle 
of  those  who,  without  attaching  themselves  to  the  more  narrow  commu 
nity  of  the  school,  sought  instruction  and  incitement  from  him,  such  dis 
tinguished  men  as  Chabrias,  Iphicrates,3  Timotheus,4  Phocion,  Hyperides, 
Lycurgus,  and  Isocrates5  are  said  to  have  belonged.  Whether  Demo 
sthenes  was  of  the  number  is  doubtful.  Even  women  are  said  to  have 
attached  themselves  to  him  as  his  disciples. 

Plato's  occupation  as  an  instructor  was  twice  interrupted  by  his  voy 
ages  to  Sicily  :  first,  when  Dion,  probably  soon  after  the  death  of  the  elder 
Dionysius,  persuaded  him  to  make  the  attempt  to  win  the  younger  Dio- 
nysius  to  philosophy;6  the  second  time,  a  few  years  later  (about  B.C. 
360),  when  the  wish  of  his  Pythagorean  friends,  and  the  invitation  of  Di 
onysius  to  reconcile  the  disputes  which  had  broken  out  between  him  and 
his  step-uncle  Dion,  brought  him  back  to  Syracuse.  His  efforts  were 
both  times  unsuccessful,  and  he  owed  his  own  safety  to  nothing  but  the 
earnest  intercession  of  Archytas.7  That  Plato  cherished  the  hope  of  re 
alizing,  through  the  conversion  of  Dionysius,  his  idea  of  a  state  in  the 
rising  city  of  Syracuse,  was  a  belief  generally  spread  in  antiquity,8  and 
which  finds  some  confirmation  in  the  expressions  of  the  philosopher  him 
self,  and  of  the  seventh  Platonic  letter,  which,  though  spurious,  is  writ 
ten  with  the  most  evident  acquaintance  with  the  matters  of  which  it 
treats.  With  the  exception  of  these  two  visits  to  Sicily,  Plato  was  oc 
cupied,  from  the  time  when  he  opened  the  school  in  the  Academy,  in 
giving  instruction  and  in  the  composition  of  his  works.  He  died  in  the 
eighty-second  year  of  his  age,  B.C.  347.  He  is  said  by  some  to  have  died 
while  writing,  by  others  at  a  marriage-feast. 

According  to  his  last  will,  his  garden  remained  the  property  of  the 
school,9  and  passed,  considerably  increased  by  later  additions,  into  the 
hands  of  the  New  Platonists,  who  kept  as  a  festival  his  birth-day,  as  well 
as  that  of  Socrates.10  Athenians  and  strangers  honored  his  memory  by 
monuments.  Yet  he  had  no  lack  of  enemies  and  enviers,  and  the  attacks 
which  wrere  made  upon  him,  partly  by  contemporary  comix;  poets,  partly 
by  one-sided  Soeratics,  as  Antisthenes,  Diogenes,  and  the  later  Mega- 
rics,11  found  a  loud  echo  among  Epicureans,  Stoics,  certain  Peripatetics, 
and  later  writers  eager  for  detraction.  Thus,  even  Antisthenes  and  Ar- 
istoxenus  charged  him  with  sensuality,  avarice,  and  sycophancy;12  and 
others  with  vanity,  ambition,  and  envy  toward  other  Socratics.13  Others, 

i  Athen.,  L,  7 ;  xii.,  69  ;  x.,  14.  a  Tzetzes,  Chiliad.,  viii.,  972. 

3  Aristid.,  ii.,  p.  325.  *  Athen.,  x.,  14.  5  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  46. 

6  Plat.,  Epist.,  vii.,  p.  327 ;  iii.,  p.  316,  C.  7  Id.  ib.,  vii.,  p.  339. 

*  Plfit.,  Philos.  eprinc.,  c.  4;  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  21.  9  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  43. 

10  Dawasc,  ap.  Phot.,  cod.  ccxlii.  u  Diog.  Latrt,,  iii.,  35  ;  vi.,  7,  &c. 

13  Id.,  jii.,  S9,  13  Athen.,  xi.,  p.  507,  D;  Itiosr.  Laert.,  vi.,  3.  7,  24,  26,  &c. 


ATTIC     PERIOD. 

again,  accused  him  of  having  borrowed  the  form  and  substance  of  his 
doctrine  from  earlier  philosophers,  as  Aristippus,  Antisthenes,1  Protag 
oras,2  Epicharmus,3  and  Philolaus.  But,  as  the  latter  accusation  is  re 
futed  both  by  the  contradiction  which  it  carries  in  itself,  and  by  a  com 
parison  of  the  Pythagorean  doctrines  with  those  of  Plato,  so  is  the  for 
mer,  not  only  by  the  weakness  of  the  evidence  brought  forward  in  its 
favor,  but  still  more  by  the  depth  and  purity  of  moral  sentiment,  which, 
with  all  the  marks  of  internal  truth,  is  reflected  in  the  writings  of  Plato. 

WRITINGS     OF     PLATO.4 

These  writings  have  come  down  to  us  complete,  and  have  always  been 
admired  as  a  model  of  the  union  of  artistic  perfection  with  philosophical 
acuteness  and  depth.  They  are  in  the  form  of  dialogue  ;  but  Plato  was 
not  the  first  writer  who  employed  this  style  of  composition  for  philosoph 
ical  instruction.  Zeno  the  Eleatic  had  already  written  in  the  form  of 
question  and  answer.  Alexamenus  the  Teian,  and  Sophron  in  the  Mimes, 
had  treated  ethical  subjects  in  the  form  of  dialogue.  Xenophon,  ^Eschin- 
es  Socraticus,  Antisthenes,  Euclides,  and  other  Socratics,  had  also  made 
use  of  the  dialogistic  form  ;  but  Plato  has  handled  this  form  not  only  with 
greater  mastery  than  any  one  who  preceded  him,  but,  in  all  probability, 
with  the  distinct  intention  of  keeping,  by  this  very  means,  true  to  the  ad 
monition  of  Socrates,  not  to  communicate  instruction,  but  to  lead  to  the 
spontaneous  discovery  of  it. 

The  dialogues  of  Plato  are  closely  connected  with  one  another,  and 
various  arrangements  of  them  have  been  proposed.  Schleiermacher's 
division  appears,  on  the  whole,  to  be  the  best.  He  divides  the  works  of 
Plato  into  three  series  or  classes.  In  the  first  he  considers  that  the 
germs  of  dialectic  and  of  the  doctrine  of  ideas  begin  to  unfold  themselves 
in  all  the  freshness  of  youthful  inspiration ;  in  the  second,  those  germs 
develop  themselves  further  by  means  of  dialectic  investigations,  respect 
ing  the  difference  between  common  and  philosophical  acquaintance  with 
things,  respecting  notion  and  knowledge  (86l-a  and  eTrto-HjjUTj) ;  in  the  third 
they  receive  their  completion  by  means  of  an  objectively  scientific  work 
ing  out,  with  the  separation  of  ethics  and  physics.  The  first  series  em 
braces,  according  to  Schleiermacher,  the  Phadrus,  Lysis,  Protagoras,  Lach 
es,  Charrmdcs,  Euthyphron,  and  Parmcnidcs ;  to  which  may  be  added,  as  an 
appendix,  the  Apologia,  Onto,  Ion,  Hippias  Minor,  Hipparchus,  Minos,  and 
Alcibiades  II.  The  second  series  contains  the  Gorgias,  Thcatctus,  Mcno, 
Euthydcmus,  Cratylus,  Sophistcs,  Politicus,  Symposium,  Ph&don,  and  Phile- 
bus ;  to  which  may  be  added,  as  an  appendix,  the  Theages,  Erasta,  Alcibi 
ades  I.,  Menexenus,  Hippias  Major,  and  Clitophon.  The  third  series  coin- 
prises  the  Republic,  Timaus,  Critias,  and  the  Laws.5 

The  genuineness  of  several  of  the  dialogues  has  been  questioned,  but, 
for  the  most  part,  on  insufficient  grounds.  The  Epinomis,  however,  is 
probably  to  be  assigned  to  a  disciple  of  Plato ;  the  Minos  and  Hipparchus 
to  a  Socratic.  The  second  Alcibiades  was  attributed  by  ancient  critics 

1  Theopomp.  ap.  Athen.,  xi.,  p.  508,  C.          2  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  37.  3  Id.,  iii.,  9. 

*  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  5  Schleiermacher's  Plato,  Einleitung,  &c.,  p.  45,  seqq. 


318  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

to  Xenophon.  The  Emsta  and  Clitophon  are  probably  of  much  later  ori 
gin.  The  Platonic  letters  were  composed  at  different  periods ;  the  old 
est  of  them,  the  seventh  and  eighth,  probably  by  disciples  of  Plato.  These 
letters,  some  of  which  are  of  considerable  length,  have  reference  to  the 
visits  made  by  Plato  to  Sicily,  and  to  the  intrigues  of  which  this  island 
was  the  theatre,  in  consequence  of  the  tyranny  of  the  younger  Dionysius 
and  the  movements  of  Dion.  The  correspondence  in  question  appears 
to  have  been  published  by  some  of  the  followers  of  Plato,  with  the  view 
of  exculpating  their  master  from  the  charge  of  fomenting  troubles  in  Syr 
acuse.  The  dialogues  Demodocus,  Sisyphus,  Eryxias,  Axiochus,  and  those 
on  justice  and  virtue,  were  with  good  reason  regarded  by  ancient  critics 
as  spurious ;  and  with  them  may  be  associated  the  Hipparchus,  Theages, 
and  the  Definitions.  The  genuineness  of  the  first  Alcibiades  seems  doubt 
ful.  The  smaller  Hippias,  the  Ion,  and  the  Menexenus,  on  the  other  hand, 
which  are  assailed  by  many  modern  critics,  may  very  well  maintain  their 
ground  as  occasional  compositions  of  Plato.1 

No  one  can  be  conversant  with  the  writings  of  Plato  without  perceiv 
ing  every  where  the  strong  tincture  of  that  poetical  spirit  which  he  dis 
played  in  his  earliest  productions.  This  is  the  principal  ground  of  those 
lofty  encomiums  which  both  ancient  and  modern  critics  have  passed  upon 
his  style,  and  particularly  of  the  high  estimation  in  which  it  was  held  by 
Cicero,  who,  treating  of  the  subject  of  diction,  says,  that  "  if  Jupiter  were 
to  speak  in  the  Greek  tongue,  he  would  use  the  language  of  Plato."  The 
accurate  Stagirite  describes  it  as  "a  middle  species  of  diction,  between 
prose  and  verse."  Some  of  his  dialogues  are  elevated  by  such  sublime 
and  glowing  conceptions,  are  enriched  with  such  copious  diction,  and 
flow  with  so  harmonious  a  rhythm,  that  they  may  truly  be  pronounced  to 
be  highly  poetical.  Even  in  the  discussion  of  abstract  subjects,  the  lan 
guage  of  Plato  is  often  clear,  simple,  and  full  of  harmony.  At  other 
times,  however,  he  becomes  turgid  and  swelling,  and  involves  himself  in 
obscurities  which  were  either  the  offspring  of  a  lofty  fancy,  or  borrowed 
from  the  Italic  school.2 

PHILOSOPHY     OF     PLATO.3 

The  attempt  to  combine  poetry  and  philosophy  (the  two  fundamental 
tendencies  of  the  Greek  mind)  gives  to  the  Platonic  dialogues  a  charm 
which  irresistibly  attracts  us,  though  we  may  have  but  a  deficient  com 
prehension  of  their  subject-matter.  Plato,  like  Socrates,  was  penetrated 
with  the  idea  that  wisdom  is  the  attribute  of  the  godhead  ;  that  philoso 
phy,  springing  from  the  impulse  to  know,  is  the  necessity  of  the  intellect 
ual  man,  and  the  greatest  of  the  blessings  in  which  he  participates.4 
When  once  we  strive  after  Wisdom  with  the  intensity  of  a  lover,  she 
becomes  the  true  consecration  and  purification  of  the  soul,  adapted  to 
lead  us  from  the  night-like  to  the  true  day.5  An  approach  to  wisdom, 
however,  presupposes  an  original  communion  with  Being;  truly  so  called  ; 

1  Schleiermacher's  Plato,  Einleitung,  &c.  2  Smith,  I.  c. 

3  Id.  ib.  *  Phaedr.,  p.  278,  D;  Lysis,  p.  218,  A ;  Apolog.,  p.  23. 

*  De  Rep.,\\i.,  p.  521,  1) ;  vi.,  p.  485,  B. 


ATTIC     PERIUD.  319 

and  this  communion,  again,  presupposes  the  divine  nature  or  immor 
tality  of  the  soul,  and  the  impulse  to  become  like  the  Eternal.  This  im 
pulse  is  the  love  which  generates  in  Truth,  and  the  development  of  it  is 
termed  Dialectics.  Out  of  the  philosophical  impulse  which  is  developed 
by  Dialectics,  not  only  correct  knowledge,  but  also  correct  action,  springs 
forth. 

Socrates's  doctrine  respecting  the  unity  of  virtue,  and  that  it  consists 
in  true,  vigorous,  and  practical  knowledge,  is  intended  to  be  set  forth  in 
a  preliminary  manner  in  yie  Protagoras,  and  the  smaller  dialogues  at 
tached  to  it.  They  are  designed,  therefore,  to  introduce  a  foundation  for 
ethics,  by  the  refutation  of  the  common  views  that  were  entertained  of 
morals  and  of  virtue  ;  for  although  not  even  the  words  ethics  and  physics 
occur  in  Plato,  and  even  dialectics  are  not  treated  of  as  a  distinct  and 
separate  province,  yet  he  must  rightly  be  regarded  as  the  originator  of 
the  three-fold  division  of  philosophy,1  inasmuch  as  he  had  before  him  the 
decided  object,  to  develop  the  Socratic  method  into  a  scientific  system  of 
dialectics,  that  should  supply  the  grounds  of  our  knowledge  as  well  as  of 
our  moral  action  (physics  and  ethics),  and,  therefore,  he  separates  the 
general  investigations  on  knowledge  and  understanding,  at  least  relative 
ly,  from  those  which  refer  to  physics  and  ethics.  Accordingly,  the  The- 
cttetus,  Sophistes,  Parmenides,  and  Cratylus  are  principally  dialectical ;  the 
Protagoras,  Gorgias,  Politicus,  and  Philebus  principally  ethical ;  while  the 
TimcBus  is  exclusively  physical.  Plato's  dialectics  and  ethics,  however, 
have  been  more  successful  than  his  physics. 

Plato's  doctrine  of  ideas  was  one  of  the  most  prominent  parts  of  his 
system.  The  great  object  of  the  dialectician  is  to  establish  what  are 
those  general  terms  which  are  the  object  of  the  mind  when  a  man  thinks. 
It  is  clear  that  they  can  not  be  objects  of  sense,  for  these  are  in  a  con 
tinual  state  of  transition.2  They  must,  therefore,  be  of  the  number  of 
those  things  which  we  know  by  means  of  reflection  (Sicw/ota),  through  the 
understanding  (\o-yi<rfj.6s,  vovs,  v6r)cris},  for  these  things  being  fixed,  belong 
to  ov<rta,  and  can  become  the  objects  of  science,  or  certain  knowledge.3 
Every  thing  of  this  kind  is  an  eTSos,  that  is,  a  general  term,*  or  quiddity.5 
Consequently,  there  is  an  idea,  or  e?5os,  of  every  thing  that  is  called  by  a 
general  name.  Hence  the  formula  for  the  universal  is  neither  '4v  only, 
as  the  Eleatics  said,  nor  iroXXa  only,  as  the  Heracliteans  asserted,  but  $i> 
teal  iroAAa,  "  the  one  and  the  many,"  i.  e.,  the  subject  of  which  many  pred 
icates  may  be  asserted,  and  which,  therefore,  appears  as  manifold.6 
From  all  this,  it  will  appear  that  Plato  regarded  philosophy  as  an  undress 
ing  of  the  world,  as  the  means  of  discovering  the  certainty  and  eternity 
which  are  in  this  world  hidden  and  wrapped  up  in  the  garb  of  the  muta 
ble  and  the  temporal.  For  if  the  sensible  is  true,  which  he  maintains 
against  the  Eleatics,  it  is  true  only  through  the  essence  of  which  it  par 
takes  ;  and  therefore  the  object  of  philosophy  must  be  to  strip  off  this 
garment  of  the  sensible,  and  ascend  to  the  superior  idea  which  contains 

1  Aristodes,  ap.  Euseb.  Prasp.  Ev,,  xi.,  33.  2  Parmenul.,  p.  152,  A. 

3  Parmen.,  p.  129,  E ;  Phasdr.,  p.  65,  C.        *  De  Rep.,  x.,  p.  596,  A  ;  Leg.,  x.,  p.  835. 
5  Pficedr.,  p.  237,  B.  c  De  Rep.,  v.,  p.  476,  A  ;  Sophist.,  p.  251,  A. 


320  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

all  the  subordinate  ones,  and  which  has  nothing  in  it  capable  of  being  ap 
prehended  by  the  senses,  for  individual  ideas  are  but  hypothetical  notions, 
for  which  a  true  ground  can  only  be  given  by  a  higher  hypothesis ;  and 
thus  God  is  the  common  standard  of  all  things,  and  not  the  individual 
man,  as  Protagoras  said.' 

The  nature  of  the  human  soul,  according  to  Plato,  is  the  same  as 
that  of  the  soul  of  the  universe  ;  but  as,  until  death  separates  them,  the 
human  soul  is  connected  with  a  mortal  body,  it  stands  in  a  relation  to 
the  sensible  or  perishable,  as  well  as  to  the*  ideal  or  eternal.  So  far  as 
it  is  related  to  the  sensible,  it  participates  in  the  changeable  and  transi 
tory  properties  of  the  sensible ;  hence  in  the  soul  there  is  a  mortal  as 
well  as  immortal  element.  The  one  is  divine  and  the  seat  of  the  reason, 
the  other  the  seat  of  the  passions.  But  when  subordinate  to  the  divine 
reason,  keeping  the  passions  in  check,  delighting  in  pure  aspirations, 
striving  after  the  real  and  beautiful,  it  is  the  link  between  the  divine  and 
human  nature,  both  of  which  are  combined  in  man.  This  link  between 
the  divine  and  the  human,  the  ideal  and  the  sensible,  has  two  antagonist 
ic  tendencies.  That  which  is  in  the  direction  of  the  divine  is  represent 
ed  by  Sv[j.6s,  which,  though  untranslatable,  implies  spirit,  heart,  zeal, 
courage,  love,  hope,  earnestness — in  a  word,  what  we  understand  by  the 
term  emotions.  The  tendency,  on  the  other  hand,  toward  the  objects 
of  sense  is  represented  by  4in6v/j.ta,  appetite,  or  concupiscence,  which  is 
capable  of  control  and  of  right  direction.  The  soul,  therefore,  may  be 
considered  as  a  state  in  which  the  reason  or  divine  soul  is  the  governing 
power,  and  the  &v/j.6s  and  firiQv^la.  are  the  subordinate  members.  When, 
therefore,  the  reason  does  not  demand  more  than  is  right,  or  the  other 
parts  refuse  their  just  obedience,  that  constitutional  state  results  which, 
according  to  Plato,  constitutes  virtue.8 

Immortality  is  the  property  of  the  rational  soul  alone,  and  the  following 
are  the  principal  Platonic  statements  and  arguments  which  refer  to  this 
great  doctrine.  Most  of  these  will  be  found  in  the  Phadon,  a  dialogue 
which  has  for  its  principal  subject-matter  the  proof  of  this  doctrine.  1. 
Whatever  comes  into  existence  proceeds  from  its  contrary,  and  as  from 
life  comes  death,  so  from  death  comes  life.  Therefore,  the  phenomena 
which  we  call  death  is  the  passing  into  life,  and  our  souls  exist  in  the 
unseen  world,  or  'A'iS^s.  2.  It  is  an  invariable  law  of  nature  that  nothing 
perishes ;  if,  therefore,  the  soul  existed  previous  to  its  union  with  the 
body,  it  necessarily  follows  that  it  is  immortal.  3.  Nothing  can  be  dis 
solved  or  dissipated  unless  it  be  compounded.  Now  the  soul  is  simple, 
uncompounded,  not  cognizable  by  the  senses,  and  therefore  not  capable 
of  dissolution,  but  endued  with  properties  of  existence  independent  of  the 
body.  4.  The  soul  is  not,  as  has  been  held  by  some,  a  mere  harmonious 
adjustment  of  the  parts  of  the  body,  which  is  destroyed  when  those  parts 
decay ;  for  harmony  can  not  coexist  with  discord,  and  the  soul,  when 
deranged  by  vice,  presents  an  appearance  of  discord  rather  than  of  har 
mony.  5.  All  knowledge  is  the  recollection  of  truth  which  was  revealed 

1  Leg.,  iv.,  p.  716,  C ;  Penny  Cyclop.,  xviii.,  p.  235. 

2  Broivne's  Hist.  Class.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  250. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  321 

to  us  in  a  former  state  of  being,  for  there  is  nothing  real  but  the  idea, 
to  which  we  can  not  attain  in  this  life.  As,  therefore,  the  soul  has  lived 
before,  so  it  will  again,  after  it  is  set  free  from  the  body.  6.  The  number 
of  immortal  beings  is  a  constant  quantity  ;  if  the  living  died  and  remained 
in  that  state,  a  universal  death  would  absorb  all  nature.  7.  The  body  is 
the  great  cause  of  error,  and  experience  proves  that  the  more  we  can  ab 
stract  ourselves  from  the  influence  of  it,  the  more  free  and  powerful  are 
the  energies  of  the  soul.  This  approximation,  therefore,  or  tendency  to 
ward  a  perfect  state,  proves  that  the  natural  state  of  the  soul,  that  in 
which  it  is  best  fitted  for  intellectual  energy,  is  one  of  independence  of 
the  body.1 

From  this  brief  and  necessarily  imperfect  sketch  of  Plato's  philosophy 
we  may  form,  notwithstanding,  some  idea  of  the  catholic  spirit  of  this 
great  writer,  and  the  grand  and  original  conceptions  by  which  he  endeav 
ored  to  unite  in  one  great  system  all  that  was  true  in  the  results  of  pre 
vious  investigations.  Plato  was  the  greatest  of  all  philosophers,  because 
he  was  the  first  who  adopted  a  true  method,  and  followed  it  out  in  all  its 
bearings  and  applications.  It  would  not  be  easy  to  overrate  the  influence 
which  Plato's  works  have  exercised  upon  the  speculations  of  all  subse 
quent  inquirers.  Although  his  name  has  not  been  so  much  bandied  about 
for  good  or  for  ill  as  that  of  his  scholar  Aristotle,  his  intellectual  empire 
has  been  neither  less  extensive  nor  less  durable.  Coleridge  has  said  that 
all  men  are  born  disciples  of  either  Aristotle  or  Plato  ;  a  saying  which,  as 
far  as  it  goes,  is  perfectly  true.  It  means  that  the  doctrines  which  Plato 
was  the  first  to  proclaim  to  the  world  will  always  be  adopted  by  those 
who  come  to  the  hearing  of  them  with  minds  akin  to  his  ;  otherwise  they 
will  have  recourse  to  the  modification  of  those  doctrines  which  was  pro 
pounded  by  Aristotle,  whose  mind  was  no  less  repugnant  than  their  own 
to  the  spirit  of  Platonism.2 

POLITICAL     THEORIES     OF     PLATO.3 

The  political  theories  which  Plato  based  upon  his  ethical  system  will 
require  only  a  brief  notice.  His  views  tended  decidedly  toward  oligarchy, 
or,  as  he  would  have  called  it,  aristocracy.  He  had  a  great  admiration 
for  Dorian  institutions,  and  a  great  aversion  to  democracies,  especially 
to  that  of  Athens.  His  connection  with  the  chief  agents  in  the  oligarch 
ical  revolution  at  Athens  may  have  had  some  share  in  this,  and  it  is  cer 
tainly  some  proof  of  the  intimate  connection  between  his  political  opin 
ions  and  those  of  the  party  to  which  we  refer,  that  the  interlocutors  in 
the  great  trilogy  of  dialogues,  which  contains  the  Republic,  the  TimcEus, 
and  the  Critias,  are,  besides  Socrates,  the  Syracusan  Hermocrates,  the 
deadliest  foe  of  Athens,  Critias,  the  head  of  the  Thirty  Tyrants,  and  Ti- 
mseus,  the  speculative  Locrian  legislator.  From  a  set  of  dialogues  man 
aged  by  such  persons  as  these  we  should  hardly  expect  any  thing  differ 
ent  in  politics  from  what  we  find  in  them ;  an  attempt,  namely,  to  recom 
mend,  by  argument  and  fiction,  a  system  of  government  based  upon 

1  Browne's  Hist.  Class.  Lit.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  250. 

3  Penny  Cyclop.,  xviii.,  p.  241.  3  Ibid.,  p.  239. 


322  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Dorian  and  immediately  upon  Lacedaemonian  institutions.  There  is 
something  eminently  unfeeling  in  the  manner  in  which  Plato,  after  the 
manner  of  the  Lacedaemonians,  considers  marriage  in  a  gross  and  phys 
ical  light,  and  subordinates  all  the  better  sentiments  of  human  nature  to 
the  harsh  jurisdiction  of  an  uncompromising  aristocracy. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  Morgenstern1  that  one  of  the  later  comedies 
of  Aristophanes,  the  Ecdesiazusa,  is  directed  against  this  Aa/cwi/ojucwta  of 
the  great  philosopher.  Stallbaum2  has  opposed  this  conjecture  with  some 
chronological  arguments,  which  Meineke  does  not  consider  satisfactory. 
Meineke3  thinks  that  Plato's  scheme  for  a  community  of  property  and 
wives  is  undoubtedly  ridiculed  in  the  Ecclesiazusa,  and  adduces,  as  an 
additional  argument  for  this,  the  satirical  remarks  of  Aristophanes  upon 
one  Aristyllus,4  whose  name  Meineke,  following  some  old  grammarians, 
regards  as  a  diminutive  form  of  Aristocles,  Plato's  original  name. 

EDITIONS    OF    PLATO. 

The  first  edition  of  the  works  of  Plato  was  that  published  by  Aldus,  Venice,  1513,  fol. ; 
the  next,  that  published  at  Basle,  in  1534,  by  Oporinus.  The  more  important  subsequent 
editions  are,  that  of  H.  Stephens,  1578,  3  vols.  fol. ;  the  Bipont  edition,  1781-86,  11  vols. 
,8vo,  to  which  should  be  added  the  "  Dialogorum  Platonis  Argumenta  exposita  et  illustra- 
ta  a  D.  Tiedemann,"  Biponti,  1786,  8vo  ;  by  Imm.  Bckker  (with  the  Latin  version  of  Fici- 
nuss  restored  to  its  original  form),  Berlin,  1816-18,  8  vols.  8vo,  to  which  were  added  two 
volumes  of  critical  commentary  and  scholia,  Berlin,  1823  ;  this  edition  was  reprinted  with 
the  notes  of  Ast,  Heindorf,  Wyttenbach,  and  others,  by  Priestley,  London,  1826, 11  vols. 
8vo  (edited  by  Burges) ;  by  Ast,  Leipzig,  1819-32,  11  vols.  8vo,  incomplete,  the  tenth  and 
eleventh  volumes  containing  annotations  on  only  four  dialogues ;  by  Stallbaum,  a  critical 
edition  of  the  text  in  8  vols.  8vo,  Leipzig,  1821-25,  completed  by  four  additional  volumes 
of  various  readings  and  other  critical  apparatus,  Leipzig,  1824-25  ;  a  reprint  of  the  text 
of  the  foregoing  edition,  by  Stallbaum,  8  vols.  12mo,  1826 ;  a  more  elaborate  edition, 
with  valuable  commentary,  was  commenced  by  the  same  editor,  Gotha,  1827,  in  Jacobs' 
and  Rost's  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  not  yet  completed,  9  vols.,  thus  far,  having  been  published  ; 
an  edition  of  the  text,  with  the  scholia  collected  by  Ruhnken,  in  Tauchnitz's  Classics, 
Leipzig,  1829,  8  vols.  16mo,  the  last  edition  revised  by  Stallbaum,  Leipzig,  1850,  8  vols. ; 
by  Baiter,  Orelli,  and  Winckelrnann,  4to,  Zurich,  1839-42,  and  a  text-reprint  of  the  same 
in  21  vols.  lOrno,  Zurich,  1839-46  ;  again  edited  by  Stallbaum,  1  vol.  small  folio,  Leipzig, 
1850 ;  a  critical  recension  of  the  text  has  been  commenced  by  C.  F.  Hermann,  in  the 
new  issue  of  Teubner's  Bibliotheca  Classica,  of  which  three  volumes  have  thus  far  ap 
peared  ;  and,  lastly,  with  Latin  translation,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  8vo,  of  which 
one  volume  has  appeared,  edited  by  Schneider. 

The  most  important  and  valuable  editions  of  separate  works  are  the  following:  Dia 
logi  Selecti  (12),  by  Heindorf,  Berlin,  1802-10,  4  vols.  8vo,  the  first  and  second  re-edited  by 
Buttmann,  Berlin,  1827-29 ;  Dialogi  Selecti  (1 1 ),  by  Fischer,  Leipzig,  four  separate  volumes, 
1770,  74,  76,  83 ;  Dialogi  iv.,  by  Buttmann,  Berlin,  fifth  edition,  1830 ;  Charmides,  from 
the  text  of  Heindorf,  by  Buttmann,  Leipzig,  1839,  8vo ;  Cratylus,  by  Fischer,  Leipzig, 
1792-99,  8vo  ;  the  doubtful  pieces  Eryxias  and  Axiochus  (already  mentioned  under  the  ac 
count  of  jEschines  Socraticus),  by  Bockh,  at  the  end  of  his  Dialogi  iv.,  Heidelberg,  1810; 
Euthyphro,  by  Stallbaum,  Leipzig,  1823,  8vo  ;  Eutkydemus  and  Gorgias,  by  Routh,  Ox 
ford,  1774  ;  Euthydemus,  by  Winckelmann,  Leipzig,  1833  ;  Gorgias,  by  Findeisen,  Gotha, 
11796  ;  by  Coraes,  Paris,  1825  ;  lo,  with  prolegomena,  &c.,  by  Nitzsch,  Leipzig,  1822,  8vo  ; 
Leges,  by  Ast,  Leipzig,  1814,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  Menexenus,  by  Loers,  Colon.,  1825,  8vo ;  Meno, 
by  Stallbaum,  Leipzig,  1827,  1839  ;  Parmenides,  by  Stallbaum,  with  prolegomena,  &c., 
Leipzig,  1839,  1848;  Phadon,  by  Wyttenbach,  Leyden,  1810,  reprinted  and  enlarged, 

1  Comment,  de  Republ.,  p.  73,  seqq.  2  Prolegom.  ad  Plat.  Remp.,  p.  68,  seqq. 

3  Hist.  Crit.  Com.  Grcsc.,  p.  289.  4  Eccles.,  646  ;  Pint.,  313. 

4  Marsilvt  Ficino,  born  at  Florence  A.D.  1433. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  323 

Leipzig,  1825  ;  with  the  notes  of  Heindorf,  Berlin,  1810  ;  Phasdrus,  by  Ast,  Leipzig,  1810; 
Phcedrus  and  Symposium,  translated,  with  copious  notes  in  German,  by  Ast,  Jena,  1817  ; 
Philebus,  by  Stallbaum,  Leipzig,  1820,  1826  ;  Politia,  or  De  Republica,  by  Ast,  Leipzig, 
1814  ;  by  Schneider,  Breslau,  1841,  3  vols.  8vo  ;  Protagoras,  by  Ast,  Leipzig,  1831  ;  Sym 
posium  and  Alcibiades  I.,  by  Ast,  Landishut,  1809  ;  Symposium,  by  Ruckert,  Leipzig, 
1829  ;  with  critical  and  exegetical  notes,  by  Wolf,  Leipzig,  1782,  1828. 

Useful  aids,  also,  for  the  student  are  Timaei  Lexicon,  by  Ruhnken,  Leyden,  1754,  1789, 
8vo,  reprinted,  with  additions,  Leipzig,  1828  and  1833  ;  Ast,  Lexicon  Platonicum,  3  vols. 
8vo,  Leipzig,  1834-38;  Mitchell,  Index  Grascitatis  Platonica,  Oxford,  1832,  2  vols.  8vo. 

Among  the  numerous  works  written  in  illustration  of  Plato,  the  following  may  be  par 
ticularly  mentioned  :  Tiedemann's  Platonis  Dialogorum  Argumenta,  &c.,  already  referred 
to  ;  System  der  Platonischen  Philosophic,  by  Tennemann,  Leipzig,  1792-95,  4  vols.  8vo  ;  Ini- 
tin  Philosophies  PlatonicoB,  by  Van  Heusde,  Leyden,  1842  ;  Platons  Leben  und  Schriften, 
by  Ast,  Leipzig,  1816  ;  Geschichte  und  System  der  Platonischen  Philosophic,  by  C.  F.  Her 
mann,  Heidelburg,  1838  ;  Platonis  de  Ideis  et  numeris  Doctrina  ex  Aristotele  illustrata,  by 
Trendelenburg,  Leipzig,  1826  ;  Platonische  Studien,  by  Zeller,  Tubingen,  1839  ;  Schleier- 
macher's  Introductions  to  the  Dialogues  of  Plato,  translated  by  Dobson,  Cambridge,  1.836, 
8vo  ;  Sewell's  Introduction  to  the  Dialogues  of  Plato,  London,  1841,  12mo. 


II.  SPEUSIPPUS  (STrew-tTTTros),'  the  successor  of  Plato,  was  a  native  of 
Athens,  and  a  nephew  of  the  philosopher  on  the  sister's  side.2    We  hear 
nothing  of  his  personal  history  till  the  time  when  he  accompanied  his 
uncle  Plato  on  his  third  journey  to  Syracuse,  where  he  displayed  consid 
erable  ability  and  prudence,  especially  in  his  amicable  relations  with  Dion.8 
He  succeeded  Plato  as  president  of  the  academy,  but  was  at  the  head  of 
the  school  for  only  eight  years  (B.C.  347-339).     He  died,  as  it  appears, 
of  a  lingering  paralytic  illness,  having  resigned  the  chair  of  instruction  to 
Xenocrates.     Speusippus  wrote  many  philosophical  works  which  are  now 
lost,  but  which  Aristotle  thought  sufficiently  valuable  to  purchase  at  the 
expense  of  three  talents.4    Aristotle,  indeed,  appears  to  have  deemed 
Speusippus  most,  of  all  his  academic  antagonists,  worthy  of  the  honor  of 
being  refuted.     From  the  few  fragments  that  remain  of  his  writings,  it 
appears  that  Speusippus  adhered  very  closely  to  the  doctrine  of  his  great 
master,  with  the  exception,  however,  of  certain  points  where  he  intro 
duced  a  modification  of  Plato's  views,  especially  with  regard  to  the  "  ul 
timate  principium,"  which  he  designated,  indeed,  like  Plato,  as  the  abso 
lutely  one,  but  would  not  have  it  to  be  regarded  as  an  existing  entity,  since 
all  dennitude  can  only  be  the  result  of  development.5     For  the  fragments, 
and  a  more  extended  account  of  the  doctrines  of  Speusippus,  the  student, 
may  consult  the  treatise  of  Ravaisson,  Speusippi  de  Primis  Rerum  Prin- 
cipiis  Placita,  Paris,  1838,  8vo. 

III.  XENOCRATES  (Eei/o/cpaTTjs),6  the  successor  of  Speusippus  in  the  aca 
demic  chair,  was  a  native  of  Chalcedon.7    He  was  born  B.C.  396,  and 
died  B.C.  314,  at  the  age  of  eighty-two.     He  attached  himself  first  to  ^Es- 
chines  the  Socratic,8  and  afterward,  while  still  a  youth,  to  Plato,  whom 
he  accompanied  to  Syracuse.     After  the  death  of  Plato,  he  betook  him 
self,  with  Aristotle,  to  Hermias,  tyrant  of  Atarneus  ;9  and,  after  his  re 
turn,  at  a  subsequent  period,  to  Athens,  he  was  repeatedly  sent  on  em- 

'  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  jyiog.  Laert.,  iv.,  1.  3  piut^  p^.,  c.  22,  17. 

*  Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  5  ;  Aul.  Gell,  iii.,  17.  5  Arist.,  Met.,  xii.,  7, 

6  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  ?  Cic.,  Acad.,  i.,  4  ;  Athen.,  xii.,  p.  530,  D. 

**  Athen.,  ix.,  p.  507.  C.  9  Strab.,  xii.,  p.  610. 


324  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

bassies  to  Philip  of  Macedon,  and  at  a  later  period  to  Antipater,  during 
the  Lamian  war.  He  is  said  to  have  wanted  quick  apprehension  and  nat 
ural  grace  ;:  but  these  defects  were  more  than  compensated  by  perse 
vering  industry,  pure  benevolence,  freedom  from  all  selfishness,  and  a 
moral  earnestness  which  obtained  for  him  the  esteem  and  confidence  of 
the  Athenians  of  his  own  time.  Yet  he  is  said  to  have  experienced  the 
fickleness  of  popular  favor,  and,  being  too  poor  to  pay  the  protection- 
money  ((jieToiKiov),  to  have  been  saved  only  by  the  courage  of  the  orator 
Lycurgus2  from  being  sold,  or  even  to  have  been  actually  purchased  by 
Demetrius  Phalereus,  and  then  emancipated.3  He  became  president  of 
the  academy  on  the  resignation  of  Speusippus,  who  was  bowed  down  by 
sickness,  and  he  occupied  that  post  for  twenty-five  years.  The  importance 
of  Xenocrates  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  Aristotle  and  Theophrastus  wrote 
upon  his  doctrines,  and  that  Panaetius  and  Cicero  entertained  a  high  re 
gard  for  him  as  a  writer  on  philosophy.  Of  his  numerous  works  only  the 
titles  have  come  down  to  us.  With  regard  to  the  doctrines  of  Xenocra 
tes,  the  student  may  consult  the  work  of  Van  de  Wynpersee,  Diatribe  de 
Xenocrate  Chalcedonio,  Lugd.  Bat.,  1822,  8vo,  and  the  review  of  the  same 
by  Brandis,  in  the  Heidelberger  Jahrbucher,  1824,  p.  275,  seqq. 

IV.  POLEMO  (IloAeViw;/))*  the  successor  of  Xenocrates  in  the  academic 
chair,  was  a  native  of  Athens  and  of  a  wealthy  and  distinguished  family. 
In  his  youth  he  was  extremely  profligate  ;  but  one  day,  when  he  was 
about  thirty,  on  his  bursting  into  the  school  of  Xenocrates  at  the  head 
of  a  band  of  revellers,  his  attention  was  so  arrested  by  the  discourse, 
which  chanced  to  be  upon  temperance,  that  he  tore  off  his  garland  and 
remained  an  attentive  listener  ;  and  having  from  that  day  adopted  an  ab 
stemious  course  of  life,  he  continued  to  frequent  the  school,  of  which,  on 
the  death  of  Xenocrates,  he  became  the  head,5  B.C.  315.  He  died  B.C. 
273,  at  a  very  advanced  age.  Polemo  esteemed  the  object  of  philosophy 
to  be  to  exercise  men  in  things  and  deeds,  not  in  dialectic  speculations ; 
his  character  was  grave  and  severe,  and  he  took  pride  in  displaying  the 
mastery  which  he  had  acquired  over  emotions  of  every  sort.  He  was  a 
close  follower  of  Xenocrates  in  all  things,  and  an  intimate  friend  of  Cra 
tes  and  Crantor,  who  were  his  disciples,  as  well  as  of  Zeno  and  Arcesi- 
las.  Crates  was  his  successor  in  the  academy.  In  literature  he  most 
admired  Homer  and  Sophocles,  and  he  is  said  to  have  been  the  author  of 
the  remark,  that  Homer  is  an  epic  Sophocles,  and  Sophocles  a  tragic 
Homer.  He  left,  according  to  Diogenes  Laertius,  several  treatises,  none 
of  which  were  extant  in  the  time  of  Suidas.  Polemo  placed  the  summum 
bonum  in  living  according  to  the  laws  of  nature.6 

VIII.     THE     CYNIC     SCHOOL. 

I.  ANTISTHENES  ('AvncrBevns^,  the  founder  of  the  Cynic  sect,  was  a  na 
tive  of  Athens ;  his  father  was  an  Athenian  citizen,  his  mother  is  said  to 
have  been  a  Thracian.  He  distinguished  himself  in  youth  at  the  battle 

1  Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  6.  '•*  Pint.,  Flamin.,  c.  12;  Vit.  Dec.  Oral.,  7. 

»  Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  14.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

5  Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  16,  seqq.  6  Diog.  Laert.,  1.  r,. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  325 

of  Tanagra  (B.C.  426),  when  he  must  have  been  about  twenty  years  of 
age.  He  was  at  first  a  hearer  of  Gorgias,  from  whom  he  learned  the 
rhetorical  style  which  he  adopted  in  his  dialogues  and  other  writings.  He 
afterward  attached  himself  to  Socrates,  and  recommended  his  own  dis 
ciples,  for  he  had  already  a  large  number  of  followers,  to  do  the  same.  His 
dwelling  was  in  the  Piraeeus,  and  he  used  to  walk  daily  the  forty  stadia 
(above  four  miles)  to  hear  his  new  master,  to  whom  he  faithfully  adhered 
to  the  end  of  his  life.  The  time  of  his  death  is  not  mentioned  ;  he  is  said 
to  have  reached  his  seventieth  year.  Antisthenes  is  reckoned  among 
those  who  preserved  at  least  a  portion  of  their  master's  doctrines  and 
manner  of  teaching.  He  was  a  man  of  stubborn  character,  and  he  car 
ried  his  opinions  to  extremes ;  yet  he  was  an  agreeable  companion,  ac 
cording  to  Xenophon,  and  distinguished  by  temperance  in  all  things. 
He  is  mentioned,  in  the  Phadon,  as  one  of  those  present  at  the  death  of 
Socrates.1  After  this  event,  he  established  a  school  in  the  gymnasium 
of  Cynosarges,  adjoining  the  temple  of  Hercules,  which  he  selected  ap 
parently  for  two  reasons  :  the  Cynosarges  was  the  gymnasium  for  those 
Athenians  who  were  not  of  genuine  Attic  stock,  and  Hercules  was  the 
ideal  model  of  manly  excellence  to  Antisthenes,  and  formed  the  subject 
of  at  least  one  of  his  treatises. 

The  followers  of  Antisthenes  were  first  called  Antisthenei,  and  after 
ward  Cynics  (KWIKOI),  a  term  that  had  reference  either  to  the  name  Cynos 
arges,  or  to  the  Greek  word  KVW,  "  a  dog,"  which  may  have  been  given 
to  the  disciples  of  Antisthenes  on  account  of  the  coarseness  of  their  man 
ners,  and  their  dog-like  neglect  of  all  forms  and  usages  of  society.2  Many 
sayings  of  Antisthenes  are  recorded  by  Diogenes.  They  are  marked  by 
a  sententious  brevity,  a  play  upon  words,  and  a  caustic  humor,  which 
may  have  contributed  to  affix  on  him  and  his  followers  the  appellation  of 
Cynic  or  snarling.  His  doctrines  had  chiefly  a  moral  and  a  practical  end. 
It  is  not  possible  to  state  them  in  any  thing  like  a  systematic  form  from 
such  evidence  as  WTC  have.  He  had  probably  no  great  originality  as  a 
thinker  ;  and  the  best  part  of  his  moral  philosophy  harmonizes  with  that 
of  Socrates.  But,  as  in  other  like  cases,  many  things  may  have  been  at 
tributed  to  Antisthenes  as  the  founder  of  a  sect,  which  belong  to  the  later 
Cynics. 

Antisthenes  placed  the  summum  bonum  in  a  life  according  to  virtue — 
virtue  consisting  in  action,  and  being  such,  that  when  once  obtained  it  is 
never  lost,  and  exempts  the  wise  man  from  the  chance  of  error  ;  that 
is,  it  is  closely  connected  with  reason,  but,  to  enable  it  to  develop  itself 
in  action,  and  to  be  sufficient  for  happiness,  it  requires  the  aid  of  energy 
(ZcaKpaTiK)]  tVx^s),  so  that  we  may  represent  him  as  teaching  that  the 
summum  bonum,  aper-f),  is  attainable  by  teaching  (StSaKT^),  and  made  up 
of  <f>p6vriffis  and  iVxta  But  here  he  becomes  involved  in  a  vicious  circle, 
for  when  asked  what  </>pJj/7jcns  is,  he  could  only  call  it  an  insight  into  good, 
having  before  made  the  good  to  consist  in  <pp6vr\<ris.z  His  philosophy  was 
directed  to  enforce  a  simple  mode  of  life  in  opposition  to  the  increasing 
luxury  of  the  age.  He  condemned  pleasure  which  was  sought  purely  for 

1  Pkred.,  t)  59.        a  Schol.  in  Aristot.,  p.  23,  Brandis.        3  Plat.,  De  Repub.,  vi.,  p.  505. 


326  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

its  own  sake,  and  which  enfeebled  the  mind  and  body ;  but  he  approved 
of  those  healthy  pleasures  which  followed  or  were  consequent  upon  la 
bor.  The  doctrines  of  the  Cynics  then  did  not  reject  pleasure  ;  they 
sought  pleasure  in  their  own  way.  The  Physicus  of  Antisthenes  con 
tained  a  theory  of  the  nature  of  the  gods,1  in  which  he  contended  for  the 
unity  of  the  Deity,  and  that  man  is  unable  to  know  him  by  any  sensible 
representation,  since  he  is  unlike  any  being  on  earth.  He  probably  held 
just  views  of  providence,  showing  the  sufficiency  of  virtue  for  happiness 
by  the  fact  that  outward  events  are  regulated  by  God  so  as  to  benefit  the 
wise.  Such,  at  least,  was  the  view  of  his  pupil,  Diogenes  of  Sinope,  and 
seems  involved  in  his  own  statement,  that  all  which  belongs  to  others  is 
truly  the  property  of  the  wise  man. 

Antisthenes,  after  he  had  established  a  school  of  his  own,  never  had 
many  disciples,  which  annoyed  him  so  much  that  he  drove  away  those 
who  did  attend  his  teaching,  except  Diogenes,  who  remained  with  him 
till  his  death.  His  staff,  and  wallet,  and  mean  clothing  were  only  proofs 
of  his  vanity,  which  Socrates  told  him  he  saw  through  the  holes  of  his 
tunic.  His  philosophy  was  evidently  thought  worthless  by  Plato  and 
Aristotle,  to  the  former  of  whom  he  was  personally  hostile.  His  school 
is  classed  by  Ritter  among  the  imperfect  Socraticists.  After  his  death, 
his  disciples  wandered  farther  and  farther  from  all  scientific  objects,  and 
plunged  more  deeply  into  fanatical  extravagances.  Perhaps  some  of 
their  exaggerated  statements  have  been  attributed  to  their  master. 

The  fragments  which  remain  of  his  writings  have  been  collected  by  Winckelmann, 
Antisthenis  Fragmenta,  &c.,  Zurich,  1842,  and  this  small  work,  with  the  account  of  him 
by  Ritter  (Gesch.  der  Philosophic,  vii.,  4),  will  supply  all  the  information  that  can  be  de 
sired. 

II.  DIOGENES  (AtoytV^s),2  a  celebrated  member  of  the  Cynic  school,  was 
a  native  of  Sinope,  in  Pontus,  and  born  about  B.C.  412.  His  father  wras 
a  banker,  named  Icesias  or  Icetas,  who  was  convicted  of  some  swindling 
transaction,  in  consequence  of  wrhich  Diogenes  quitted  Sinope  and  went 
to  Athens.  His  youth  is  said  to  have  been  spent  in  dissolute  extrava 
gance  ;  but  at  Athens  his  attention  was  arrested  by  the  character  of  An 
tisthenes,  who  at  first  drove  him  away.  Diogenes,  however,  could  not 
be  prevented  from  attending  him  even  by  blows,  but  told  him  that  he 
would  find  no  stick  hard  enough  to  keep  him  away.  Antisthenes  at  last 
relented,  and  his  pupil  soon  plunged  into  the  most  frantic  excesses  of 
austerity  and  rnoroseness.  In  summer  he  used  to  roll  in  the  hot  sand, 
and  in  winter  to  embrace  statues  covered  with  snow ;  he  wore  coarse 
clothing,  lived  on  the  plainest  food,  slept  in  porticoes  or  in  the  street,  and 
finally,  according  to  the  common  story,  took  up  his  residence  in  a  tub  be 
longing  to  the  Metroum,  or  temple  of  the  mother  of  the  gods.  The  truth 
of  this  latter  tale,  however,  has  been  reasonably  disputed.3 

In  spite  of  his  strange  eccentricities,  Diogenes  appears  to  have  been 
much  respected  at  Athens,  and  to  have  been  privileged  to  rebuke  any  thing 
of  which  he  disapproved.  He  seems  to  have  ridiculed  and  despised  all 

i  Cic.,  N.  D.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Consult  the  authorities  quoted  by  Stahr  in  Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD. 


327 


intellectual  pursuits,  which  did  not  directly  and  obviously  tend  to  some 
immediate  practical  good.  He  abused  literary  men  for  reading  about  the 
evils  of  Ulysses,  and  neglecting  their  own ;  musicians  for  stringing  the 
lyre  harmoniously,  while  they  left  their  minds  discordant ;  men  of  sci 
ence  for  troubling  themselves  about  the  moon  and  stars,  while  they  neg 
lected  what  lay  immediately  before  them;  orators  for  learning  to  say 
what  was  right,  but  not  to  practise  it.  Various  sarcastic  sayings  of  the 
same  kind  are  handed  down  to  us  as  his,  generally  showing  that  unwise 
contempt  for  the  common  opinions  and  pursuits  of  men  which  is  so  un 
likely  to  reform  them.  On  a  voyage  to  ^Egina,  he  was  taken  prisoner  by 
pirates,  and  carried  to  Crete,  to  be  sold  as  a  slave.  Here,  when  he  was 
asked  what  business  he  understood,  he  answered,  "  How  to  command 
men."  He  was  purchased  by  Xeniades  of  Corinth,  over  whom  he  ac 
quired  such  influence  that  he  soon  received  from  him  his  freedom,  and 
was  intrusted  with  the  care  of  his  children,  and  passed  his  old  age  in  his 
house.  During  his  residence  at  Corinth,  his  celebrated  interview  with 
Alexander  the  Great  is  said  to  have  taken  place.  Diogenes  died  at  Cor 
inth,  at  the  age  of  nearly  ninety,  B.C.  323. 

With  regard  to  the  philosophy  of  Diogenes  there  is  little  to  say,  as  he 
was  utterly  without  any  scientific  object  whatsoever.  His  system,  if  it 
deserve  the  name,  was  purely  practical,  and  consisted  merely  in  teach 
ing  men  to  dispense  with  the  simplest  and  most  necessary  wants  j1  and 
his  whole  style  of  teaching  was  a  kind  of  caricature  upon  that  of  Socra 
tes,  whom  he  imitated  in  imparting  instruction  to  persons  whom  he  cas 
ually  met,  and  with  a  still  more  supreme  contempt  for  time,  place,  and 
circumstances.  Hence  he  was  sometimes  called  "the  mad  Socrates." 
He  did  not  commit  his  opinions  to  writing,  and  therefore  those  attributed 
to  him  can  not  be  certainly  relied  on.  The  most  peculiar,  if  correctly 
stated,  was,  that  all  minds  are  air,  exactly  alike,  and  composed  of  similar 
particles,  but  that  in  the  irrational  animals  and  in  idiots  they  are  hindered 
from  properly  developing  themselves  by  the  arrangement  and  various 
humors  of  their  bodies.  This  resembles  the  Ionic  doctrine,  and  has  been 
referred  by  Brucker2  to  Diogenes  of  Apollonia. 

Diogenes  died  in  the  same  year  with  Alexander,  and,  as  Plutarch  tells 
us,  both  died  on  the  same  day.  If  so,  this  was  probably  the  6th  of  Thar- 
gelion. 

IX.     PERIPATETIC      SCHOOL. 

I.  ARISTOTELES  ('Apto-ToreATjs),3  the  celebrated  founder  of  this  school, 
was  born  at  Staglra,  a  town  in  Chalcidice,  in  Macedonia,  B.C.  384.  His 
father,  Nicomachus,  was  physician  in  ordinary  to  Amyntas  II.,  king  of 
Macedonia,  and  the  author  of  several  treatises  on  subjects  connected 
with  natural  science.  His  mother,  Phaestis  (or  Phsestias),  was  descended 
from  a  Chalcidian  family.4  The  studies  and  occupation  of  his  father  ac 
count  for  the  early  inclination  manifested  by  Aristotle  for  the  investiga 
tion  of  nature,  an  inclination  which  is  perceived  throughout  his  whole  life. 

1  Diog.  Laert.,  vi.,  70.  2  Hist.  Crit.  Phil.,  ii.,  2, 1,  $  21. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Di.nm/s..  F)c  Dcmnsth.  ft  Arist..  5. 


328  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

He  lost  his  father  before  he  had  attained  his  seventeenth  year,  and  he 
was  intrusted  to  the  guardianship  of  one  Proxenus,  of  Atarneus,  in  Mys- 
ia,  who  was  settled  in  Stagira.  In  B.C.  367,  when  seventeen  years  of 
age,  he  went  to  Athens  to  pursue  his  studies,  and  there  became  a  pupil 
of  Plato,  upon  the  return  of  the  latter  from  Sicily,  about  B.C.  365.  Plato 
soon  distinguished  him  above  all  his  other  disciples.  He  named  him 
"the  intellect  of  his  school"  (vovs  TTJS  Siarpifiiis),1  and  his  house  the  house 
of  the  "  reader"  (wayvuvr-ris}.  Aristotle  lived  at  Athens  for  twenty  years, 
till  B.C.  347.  During  the  whole  of  this  period  the  good  understanding 
which  subsisted  between  teacher  and  scholar  continued,  with  some  tri 
fling  exceptions,  undisturbed,  for  the  stories  of  the  disrespect  and  ingrat 
itude  of  the  latter  toward  the  former  are  nothing  but  calumnies  invented 
by  his  enemies.  During  the  last  ten  years  of  his  first  residence  at  Ath 
ens,  Aristotle  gave  instruction  in  rhetoric,  and  distinguished  himself  by 
his  opposition  to  Isocrates,  at  that  time  the  most  distinguished  teacher 
of  rhetoric.  Indeed,  he  appears  to  have  opposed  most  decidedly  all  the 
earlier  arid  contemporary  theories  of  rhetoric.2  His  opposition  to  Isocra 
tes,  however,  led  to  most  important  consequences,  as  it  accounts  for  the 
bitter  hatred  which  was  afterward  manifested  toward  Aristotle  and  his 
school  by  all  the  followers  of  Isocrates.  It  was  the  conflict  of  profound 
philosophical  investigation  with  the  superficiality  of  stylistic  and  rhetor 
ical  accomplishment,  of  which  Isocrates  might  be  looked  upon  as  the 
principal  representative,  since  he  not  only  despised  poetry,  but  held  phys 
ics  and  mathematics  to  be  illiberal  studies,  cared  not  to  know  any  thing 
about  philosophy,  and  looked  upon  the  accomplished  man  of  the  world  and 
the  clever  rhetorician  as  the  true  philosophers.  On  this  occasion  Aristotle 
published  his  first  rhetorical  writings.  That  during  this  time  he  contin 
ued  to  maintain  his  connection  with  the  Macedonian  court  is  intimated 
by  his  going  on  an  embassy  to  Philip  of  Macedonia  on  some  business  of 
the  Athenians.3  Moreover,  we  have  still  the  letter  in  which  his  royal 
friend  announces  to  him  the  birth  of  his  son  Alexander.4 

After  the  death  of  Plato,  which  occurred  during  the  above-mentioned 
embassy  of  Aristotle,  the  latter  left  Athens,  though  we  do  not  exactly 
know  for  what  reason.  Perhaps  he  was  offended  by  Plato's  having  ap 
pointed  Speusippus  as  his  successor  in  the  Academy.5  At  the  same 
time,  it  is  more  probable  that,  after  the  notions  of  the  ancient  philoso 
phers,  he  esteemed  travels  in  foreign  parts  as  a  necessary  completion  of 
his  education.  He  first  repaired  to  his  friend  Hermias,  at  Atarneus.  A 
few  years,  however,  after  the  arrival  of  Aristotle,  Hermias,  through  the 
treachery  of  Mentor,  a  Grecian  general  in  the  Persian  service,  fell  into 
the  hands  of  the  Persians,  of  whom  he  had  made  himself  independent, 
and  was  put  to  death.  Aristotle,  who  had  married  Pythias,  the  adopted 
daughter  of  Hermias,  fled  with  his  wife  to  Mytilene.  A  poem  on  his  un 
fortunate  friend,  which  is  still  preserved,  testifies  the  warm  affection 
which  he  had  felt  for  him.  He  afterward  caused  a  statue  to  be  erected 
to  his  memory  at  Delphi.6 

i  Phtiopon.,  De  JEternit.  Mund.,  vi.,  27.      2  Aristot.,  Rhet.,  i.,  1,2.      '•>  Diog.  Laert.,  v.,  2. 
*  Aul.  Gell.,  ix.,  3.  5  Diog.  Laert.,  1.  c. ;  iv.,  1.  6  Id.  ib.,  v.,  6,  seq. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  329 

Two  years  after  his  flight  from  Atarneus  (B.C.  342),  he  accepted  an  in 
vitation  from  Philip  of  Macedonia  to  undertake  the  instruction  of  his  son 
Alexander,  then  thirteen  years  of  age.1  At  the  court  of  this  monarch  he 
was  treated  with  the  most  marked  respect;  his  native  city,  Stagira, 
which  had  been  destroyed  by  Philip,  with  many  other  Grecian  cities  in 
the  same  quarter,  was  rebuilt  at  his  request,  and  the  monarch  caused  a 
gymnasium  to  be  erected  there,  irt  a  pleasant  grove,  expressly  for  Aris 
totle  and  his  pupils.  Plutarch  informs  us  that  several  other  noble  youths 
enjoyed  the  instruction  of  Aristotle  along  writh  Alexander,2  among  whom 
we  may  mention  Cassander,  the  son  of  Antipater,3  Marsyas  of  Pella 
(brother  of  Antigonus,  afterward  king),  and  Ptolemy,  the  future  monarch 
of  Egypt.  Alexander  attached  himself  with  such  ardent  affection  to  the 
philosopher,  that  the  youth,  whom  no  one  yet  had  been  able  to  manage, 
soon  valued  his  instructor  above  his  own  father.  Aristotle  spent  seven 
years  in  Macedonia,  but  Alexander  enjoyed  his  instruction  without  inter 
ruption  for  only  four.  But  with  such  a  pupil  even  this  short  period  was 
sufficient  for  a  teacher  like  Aristotle  to  fulfill  the  highest  purposes  of  edu 
cation,  to  aid  the  development  of  his  pupil's  faculties  in  every  direction, 
to  awaken  susceptibility  and  lively  inclination  for  every  art  and  science, 
and  to  create  in  him  that  sense  of  the  noble  and  great  which  distinguishes 
Alexander  from  all  the  conquerors  who  have  only  swept  like  a  hurricane 
through  the  world.  According  to  the  usual  mode  of  Grecian  education, 
a  knowledge  of  the  poets,  eloquence,  and  philosophy  were  the  principal 
subjects  into  which  Aristotle  initiated  his  royal  pupil.  Thus  we  are  even 
informed  that  he  prepared  a  new  recension  of  the  Iliad  for  him,4  that  he 
instructed  him  in  ethics  and  politics,5  and  disclosed  to  him  the  abstrusi 
ties  of  his  own  speculations,  of  the  publication  of  which  by  his  writings 
Alexander  afterward  complained.6 

On  Alexander's  accession  to  the  throne,  in  B.C.  335,  Aristotle  returned 
to  Athens.  Here  he  found  his  friend  Xenocrates  president  of  the  Acad 
emy.  He  himself  had  the  Lyceum,  a  gymnasium  sacred  to  Apollo  Lyce- 
us,  assigned  him  by  the  state.  He  soon  assembled  around  him  a  large 
number  of  distinguished  scholars,  to  whom  he  delivered  lectures  in  phi 
losophy,  in  the  shady  walks  (TTC pi-Karat)  which  surrounded  the  Lyceum, 
while  walking  up  and  down  (irepnraT&v),  and  not  sitting,  which  last  was 
the  general  practice  of  the  philosophers.  From  one  or  other  of  these 
circumstances  the  name  Peripatetic  is  derived,  which  was  afterward  giv 
en  to  his  school.  He  gave  two  different  courses  of  lectures  every  day.7 
Those  which  he  delivered  in  the  morning  (IwQivbs  Treporaros),  to  a  narrower 
circle  of  chosen  and  confidential  (esoteric)  hearers,  and  which  were  called 
acroamatic  or  acroatic,  embraced  subjects  connected  with  the  more  abstruse 
philosophy  (theology),  physics,  and  dialectics.  Those  which  he  delivered 
in  the  afternoon  (SetAi^s  Trepiiraros),  and  intended  for  a  more  promiscuous 
circle  (which,  accordingly,  he  called  exoteric),  extended  to  rhetoric,  so 
phistics,  and  politics.  He  appears  to  have  taught  not  so  much  in  the 

1  Pint.,  Alex.,  5;  Quintil.,  i.,  1.  2  Apophth.  Reg.,  vol.  v.,  p.  683,  ed,  Reisfce. 

3  Plut.,  Alex.,  74.  *  Wolf,  Prolegom.,  p.  clxxxi. 

»  Plut.,  Alex.,  7.  e  Gell.,  xx.,  5.  '  Id.  ift. 


330  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

way  of  conversation  as  in  regular  lectures.  His  school  soon  became  the 
most  celebrated  in  Athens,  and  he  continued  to  preside  over  it  for  thir 
teen  years  (B.C.  335-323).  During  this  time  he  also  composed  the  great 
er  part  of  his  works.  In  these  labors  he  was  assisted  by  the  truly  kingly 
liberality  of  his  former  pupil,  who  not  only  presented  him  with  800  tal 
ents,  but  also  caused  large  collections  of  natural  curiosities  to  be  made 
for  him,  to  which  posterity  is  indebted  for  one  of  his  most  excellent 
works,  the  History  of  Animals.1 

Meanwhile,  various  causes  contributed  to  throw  a  cloud  over  the  latter 
years  of  the  philosopher's  life.  In  the  first  place,  he  felt  deeply  the  death 
of  his  wife  Pythias,  who  left  behind  her  a  daughter  of  the  same  name : 
he  lived  subsequently  with  a  friend  of  his  wife's,  the  slave  Herpyllis,  who 
bore  him  a  son,  Nicomachus.2  But  a  source  of  still  greater  grief  was  an 
interruption  of  the  friendly  relation  in  which  he  had  hitherto  stood  to  his 
royal  pupil.  This  was  occasioned  by  the  conduct  of  Callisthenes,  the 
nephew  and  pupil  of  Aristotle,  who  had  vehemently  and  injudiciously  op 
posed  the  changes  in  the  conduct  and  policy  of  Alexander.  Still,  Alex 
ander  refrained  from  any  expression  of  hostility  toward  his  former  in 
structor,  although  their  previous  cordial  connection  no  longer  subsisted 
undisturbed.  The  story  that  Aristotle  had  a  share  in  poisoning  the  king 
is  a  fabrication  of  a  later  age,  and,  moreover,  it  is  most  probable  that  Al 
exander  died  a  natural  death.  After  the  death  of  this  monarch  (B.C.  323), 
Aristotle  was  looked  upon  with  suspicion  at  Athens  as  a  friend  of  Mace 
donia  ;  but  as  it  was  not  easy  to  bring  any  political  accusation  against 
him,  he  was  accused  of  impiety  (direySems)  by  the  hierophant  Eurymedon. 
He  withdrew  from  Athens  before  his  trial,  and  escaped,  in  the  beginning 
of  B.C.  322,  to  Chalcis,  in  Eubcea,  where  he  died  in  the  course  of  the 
same  year,  in  the  sixty-third  year  of  his  age,  of  a  chronic  disease  of  the 
stomach.  His  body  was  transported  to  his  native  city,  Stagira,  and  his 
memory  was  honored  there,  like  that  of  a  hero,  by  yearly  festivals.  He 
bequeathed  to  Theophrastus  his  well-stored  library,  and  the  originals  of 
his  writings. 

In  person,  Aristotle  was  short  and  of  slender  make,  with  small  eyes, 
and  a  lisp  in  his  pronunciation,  using  L  for  R,  and  with  a  sort  of  sarcastic 
expression  in  his  countenance.  He  exhibited  remarkable  attention  to 
external  appearance,  and  bestowed  much  care  upon  his  dress  and  person. 
He  is  described  as  having  been  of  weak  health,  which,  considering  the 
astonishing  extent  of  his  studies,  shows  all  the  more  the  energy  of  his 
mind.  The  whole  demeanor  of  Aristotle  was  marked  by  a  certain  brisk 
ness  and  vivacity.  His  powers  of  eloquence  were  considerable,  and  of  a 
kind  adapted  to  produce  conviction  in  his  hearers,  a  gift  which  Antipater 
praises  highly  in  a  letter  written  after  Aristotle's  death. 

WORKS     OF     ARISTOTLE. 

The  numerous  works  of  Aristotle  may  be  divided  into  the  following 
classes,  according  to  the  subjects  of  which  they  treat.  We  only  mention 
the  most  important  in  each  class. 

'  Piin.,  H.  N.,  viii.,  17.  '  Diog.  Laert.,  v.,  1 ;  v.,  13. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  331 


I.    DIALECTICS    AND    LOGIC.1 

The  extant  logical  writings  are  comprehended  as  a  whole  under  the 
title  Organon  ("Opyavov,  i.  e.,  instrument  of  science).  They  are  occupied 
with  the  investigation  of  the  method  by  which  man  arrives  at  knowledge. 
An  insight  into  the  nature  and  formation  of  conclusions,  and  of  proof  by 
means  of  conclusions,  is  the  common  aim  and  centre  of  all  the  separate 
six  works  composing  the  Organon.  These  separate  works  are  :  1.  KOTTJ- 
yopiai,  Pr&ciicamenta,  or  "  Categories,"  in  which  Aristotle  treats  of  the  ten 
comprehensive  generic  ideas,  under  which  all  the  attributes  of  things 
may  be  subordinated  as  species.  These  are,  Substance,  Quantity,  Quality, 
Relation,  Where,  When,  Position  (/ce?<r0at),  to  Have,  to  be  Active,  to  be  Pas 
sive.  The  doctrine  of  the  Categories  has  been  important  to  philosophy, 
for  a  great  question  is  there  propounded,  and  an  insight  is  opened  into 
the  most  essential  notions  of  the  mind.  The  Stoics  in  ancient,  and  Kant 
in  modern  times,  have  occupied  themselves  very  much  with  this  subject ; 
and  the  progress  of  the  modern  German  logic  is  connected  with  the  in 
quiry,  from  what  principles  the  Categories  are  developed  in  the  thought, 
and  what  authority  they  have.  2.  Ufpl  eppijvetas,  De  interpretatione,  con 
cerning  the  expression  of  thought  by  means  of  speech.  In  this  work  Ar 
istotle  examines  the  judgment  and  its  various  forms,  the  general,  the  par 
ticular,  and  the  indefinite  judgment ;  the  model-forms,  as  they  appear  in 
the  judgment,  of  reality,  possibility,  chance,  and  necessity  ;  the  value  and 
the  relations  of  these  forms  ;  and  he  discusses  the  subject  of  contraries. 
The  mode  of  treating  these  matters  is  so  acute  and  subtle,  but  yet  so  dif 
ficult,  that  the  ancients  said  that  Aristotle,  when  he  wrote  this  book,  dip 
ped  his  pen  in  intellect.  3,  4.  'AyaAim/ca  Trptrfpa  and  va-repa,  Analytica 
Priora  and  Posteriora,  each  in  two  books,  on  the  theory  of  conclusions,  so 
called  from  the  resolution  of  the  conclusion  into  its  fundamental  com 
ponent  parts.  The  Analytica  Priora  are  specially  occupied  about  the  syl 
logism,  and  therein  Aristotle  shows  a  wonderful,  one  might  say  a  mathe 
matical,  combination  of  all  possible  relationship,  and  a  comprehensive  view 
of  the  internal  nature  of  the  syllogism,  especially  of  the  middle  term.  The 
Analytica  Posteriora  go  farther,  inasmuch  as  they  have  for  their  object  to 
ascertain  how  science  is  established  through  the  conclusions  of  the  syl 
logism.  Accordingly,  they  treat  of  proof,  and  the  general  and  particular 
principles  of  the  sciences.  5.  ToiriKa,  De  Locis,  in  eight  books,  of  the  gen 
eral  points  of  view  (rAwi)  from  which  conclusions  may  be  drawn.  6. 
Uepl  <ro<j>HTTiKwt>  eA.eyxo>j/,  concerning  the  fallacies  which  only  apparently 
prove  something.  This  work  contains  an  examination  and  solution  of 
sophistical  fallacies,  especially  those  of  the  Megaric  school. — There  is 
generally  prefixed  to  the  Organon  the  Introduction  of  Porphyry,  entitled 
Tlopfyvpiov  eisaydry-fi,  or  Hep}  TU>V  TreWe  (/wj/a>j/,  "  On  the  Five  Voices,"  which 

is  a  treatise  on  the  logical  notions  of  genus  and  species,  differences,  prop 
er  or  peculiar,  and  accident.  It  is  an  introduction  to  the  Aristotelian 
logic,  and  was  much  used  in  the  Middle  Ages. 

i  Smith,  1.  c. ;  Trendelenburg,  Biog.  Diet.,  Soc.  U.  K.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  457,  seqq. 


332  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


II.    THEORETICAL    PHILOSOPHY.1 

This  consists  of  Metaphysics,  Mathematics,  and  Physics,  on  all  of  which 
Aristotle  wrote  works.  1.  The  Metaphysics  (T&  yuera  ra  <pvffiKa),  in  four 
teen  books.  The  first  part  of  Theoretical  Philosophy,  according  to  Aris 
totle,  is  metaphysic.  He  calls  it  the  "  First  Philosophy"  (T^TT?  </><\o<ro</>- 
ia,  Philosophia  Prima),  because  it  treats  of  Being  as  Being,  and  consid 
ers  the  general  principles  in  which  the  objects  of  the  other  sciences,  as 
particular  parts  of  Being,  have  their  foundation.  In  ancient  times,  as, 
for  instance,  in  Plutarch's  "  Life  of  Alexander,"  the  books  which  contain 
the  First  Philosophy  are  called  "  Metaphysic"  (jueret  ra  <pv<rncd'),  or  that 
which  comes  after  the  physical  writings.  This  term,  which  with  us  has 
become  the  name  of  the  science,  does  not  denote  any  relation  of  the  two 
subjects,  as  has  sometimes  been  supposed,  contrary  to  the  usage  of  the 
preposition  /j.erd,  as  if  it  denoted  that  which,  as  being  above,  lies  beyond 
Nature,  or  lies  beyond  Nature  as  the  hidden  power.  The  fact  is,  that  the 
title  has  merely  an  accidental  origin,  as  the  old  commentators  expressly 
say.  When  the  ancients  were  arranging  the  wTorks  of  Aristotle,  they 
placed  the  First  Philosophy  after  the  books  on  Physics,  and  expressed 
this  fact  by  the  title  ^era  ra  $v<n/ca,  or  metaphysics.  2.  In  Mathematics 
we  have  two  treatises  by  Aristotle :  (I.)  Uepl  ar6^(av  ypa/j./j.uiv,  i.  e.,  con 
cerning  "  indivisible  lines,"  which  treats  of  the  infinite  divisibility  of  mag 
nitudes.  (II.)  M-nxwiKa  TrpojSA^uara,  or  Mechanical  Problems,  a  treatise 
of  which  Vitruvius  has  made  some  use. 

3.  In  Physics*  we  have,  (I.)  Physics  (fyvcriK.^  a.Kp6affis,  called  also  by 
others  irepl  apxw)-  It  consists  of  eight  books,  in  which  Aristotle  devel 
ops  the  general  principles  of  natural  science  (Cosmology).  One  of  the 
most  remarkable  parts  of  this  work  is  the  subtle  and  exhaustive  discus 
sion  of  the  nature  of  Space  and  Time,  in  the  fourth  book ;  and  in  the 
eighth  book,  in  a  discussion  which  corresponds  to  one  in  the  Metaphysic, 
Aristotle,  by  inferring  a  principle  which  is  at  rest,  the  unmoved,  which 
produces  motion,  has  given  the  first  indication  of  the  celebrated  cosmo- 
logical  proof  of  the  existence  of  God  as  the  prime  mover.  (II.)  Concern 
ing  the  Heavens  (irepl  ovpdvov),  in  four  books.  The  heavens,  according  to 
Aristotle,  extend  from  the  extreme  limits  of  the  world  to  the  moon,  and 
they  move,  according  to  their  nature,  in  a  circular  direction  about  the 
earth,  which  is  in  the  centre  at  rest.  Aristotle,  in  the  second  book,  speaks 
of  a  passage  of  the  moon  over  the  disk  of  Mars,  which  he  observed  him 
self;  Kepler  calculated  that  this  phenomenon  took  place  in  the  year  B.C. 
357,  and,  consequently,  the  observation  would  belong  to  the  time  of  Ar 
istotle's  first  residence  at  Athens,  when  he  was  closely  connected  with 
Plato.  (HI.)  On  Production  and  Destruction  (irepl  yev€<re<as  Kal  (p0opcis),  in 
two  books,  developing  the  general  laws  of  production  and  destruction. 
(IV.)  On  Meteorology  (MfTtapoXoyiKd},  in  four  books,  treating  of  the  oper 
ation  of  the  elements  as  shown  in  aetherial  phenomena,  and  especially 
of  fiery  meteors,  and  of  the  phenomena  produced  on  the  earth  by  means 
of  water.  To  this  division  of  Aristotle's  writings  belongs  the  work  on 

1  Smith,  1.  c. ;  Trenddenburg,  Biog.  Diet.,  Soc.  U.  K.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  457,  seqq.         2  Id.  ib. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  333 

the  local  names  of  the  various  winds  (avf^tav  befffts  KCU  Trposijyopiat),  which 
is  all  that  is  preserved  of  the  larger  work  entitled  Trepl  ai\^(wv  xeijue6j'<w, 
or  "  On  the  Signs  of  Storms."  (V.)  On  the  Universe  (irepl  Kdffpov,  De  Mun- 
do),  a  letter  to  Alexander,  treating  the  subject  of  the  last  two  works  in  a 
popular  style  and  rhetorical  tone  altogether  foreign  to  Aristotle.  The 
whole  is  probably  a  translation  of  a  work  with  the  same  title  by  Appuleius. 
(VI.)  The  History  of  Animals  (irepl  &uv  Iffropia),  in  ten  books.  This  work 
contains  no  proper  system  of  zoology ;  but  animals  are  classed  accord 
ing  to  various  principles  of  division,  for  the  purpose  of  subjecting  to  ex 
amination  their  parts,  their  functions,  their  active  energies,  and  their 
mode  of  life.  Pliny  drew  largely  from  this  work  in  his  Natural  History. 
Many  discoveries  of  Aristotle  have  been  made  again  in  recent  times ; 
for  instance,  the  smooth  shark  (ya\ebs  Ae?os).  This  great  work,  partly 
the  fruit  of  the  kingly  liberality  of  Alexander,  has  not  reached  us  quite 
complete.  On  the  other  hand,  respecting  a  tenth  book,  appended  in  the 
MSS.,  which  treats  of  barrenness  in  the  female,  scholars  are  not  agreed. 
The  observations  in  this  work  are  the  triumph  of  ancient  sagacity,  and 
have  been  confirmed  by  the  results  of  the  most  recent  investigations. 
(VII.)  On  the  parts  of  Animals  (irepl  &wv  /xopiW),  in  four  books,  in  which 
Aristotle,  after  describing  the  phaenomena  in  each  species,  develops  the 
causes  of  these  phaenomena  by  means  of  the  idea  to  be  formed  of  the 
purpose  which  is  manifested  in  the  formation  of  the  animal.  (VIII.)  On 
the  generation  of  Animals  (irepl  £uwv  yevea-fus},  in  five  books,  treating  of  the 
generation  of  animals  and  the  organs  of  generation.  (IX.)  On  the  pro 
gression  of  Animals  (irepl  £c£a>j/  Tropeias),  or  De  incessu  animalium,  treating 
of  the  instruments  by  which  change  of  place  is  effected.  (X.)  On  the 
Soul  (irepl  «J/vx7js),  in  three  books.  After  he  has  criticised  the  views  of 
earlier  investigators,  he  himself  defines  the  soul  to  be  "  the  internal  form 
ative  principle  of  a  body  which  may  be  perceived  by  the  senses  and  is 
capable  of  life." 

Several  anatomical  works  of  Aristotle  have  been  lost.  He  was  the  first 
person  who,  in  any  special  manner,  advocated  anatomical  investigations, 
and  showed  the  necessity  of  them  for  the  study  of  the  natural  sciences. 
He  frequently  refers  to  investigations  of  his  own  on  the  subject. 

III.    PRACTICAL    PHILOSOPHY    OR    POLITICS.1 

All  that  falls  within  the  sphere  of  practical  philosophy  is  comprehended 
in  three  principal  works :  the  Ethics,  the  Politics,  and  the  (Economics. 
1.  The  Nicomachean  Ethics  ("ROiKa  Nt/cojuc£x€ta)>  m  ten  books.  Aristotle 
here  begins  with  the  highest  and  most  universal  end  of  life,  for  the  indi 
vidual  as  well  as  for  the  community  in  the  state.  This  is  happiness 
(fvSai/j.ovla) ;  and  its  conditions  are,  on  the  one  hand,  perfect  virtue,  ex 
hibiting  itself  in  the  actor  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  corresponding  bodily 
advantages  and  favorable  external  circumstances..  Virtue  is  the  readi 
ness  to  act  constantly  and  consciously  according  to  the  laws  of  the  ra 
tional  nature  of  man  (6p6bs  \6yos).  The  nature  of  virtue  shows  itself  in 
its  appearing  as  the  medium  between  two  extremes.  In  accordance  with 
1  Smith,  1.  c. ;  Trendelenburg,  Biog.  Diet.,  Soc.  U.  K.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  457,  seqq. 


334 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


this,  the  several  virtues  are  enumerated  and  characterized.  The  authen 
ticity  of  the  work,  which  an  ancient  tradition  ascribes  to  Nicomachus, 
the  son  of  Aristotle,  is  indubitable,  though  there  is  some  dispute  as  to 
the  proper  arrangement  of  the  several  books.  Why  these  writings  were 
called  Nicomachean,  we  can  not  tell ;  whether  the  father  so  named  them 
as  a  memorial  of  his  affection  for  his  young  son,  or  whether  they  derived 
their  title  from  being  afterward  edited  and  commented  on  by  Nicomachus. 
2.  The  Eudemean  Ethics  (3H0t/ca  EuS^ueta),  in  seven  books,  of  which  only 
books  L,  ii.,  iii.,  and  vii.  are  independent,  while  the  remaining  books,  iv., 
v.,  and  vi.  agree  word  for  word  with  books  v.,  vi.,  and  vii.  of  the  Nico 
machean  ethics.  This  ethical  work  is,  perhaps,  a  recension  of  Aristotle's 
lectures,  edited  by  Eudemus.  3.  The  Great  Ethics  ('H0i/c«  yueyaAa),  or 
Magna  Moralia,  in  two  books.  .  Pansch  has  lately  endeavored  to  show 
that  this  is  not  a  work  of  Aristotle's,  but  an  abstract,  and  one,  too,  not 
made  by  a  very  skillful  hand ;  while  another  critic  looks  upon  it  as  the 
authentic  first  sketch  of  the  larger  work.  4.  Politics  (IloAmKa),  in  eight 
books.  The  Ethics  conduct  us  to  the  Politics.  The  connection  between 
the  two  works  is  so  close,  that  in  the  Ethics,  by  the  word  vcnepov,  refer 
ence  is  made  by  Aristotle  to  the  Politics  ;  and  in  the  latter,  by  irptrfpov, 
to  the  Ethics.  The  Politics  show  how  happiness  is  to  be  attained  for  the 
human  community  in  the  state ;  for  the  object  of  the  state  is  not  merely  the 
external  preservation  of  life,  but  "happy  life,"  as  it  is  attained  by  means 
of  virtue  (aper^,  perfect  development  of  the  whole  man).  Hence,  also, 
ethics  form  the  first  and  most  general  foundation  of  political  life,  because 
the  state  can  not  attain  its  highest  object  if  morality  does  not  prevail 
among  its  citizens.  The  house,  the  family,  is  the  element  of  the  state. 
Accordingly,  Aristotle  begins  with  the  doctrine  of  domestic  economy, 
then  proceeds  to  a  description  of  the  different  forms  of  government,  after 
which  he  gives  a  delineation  of  the  most  important  Hellenic  constitu 
tions,  and  then  investigates  which  of  the  constitutions  is  the  best  (the 
ideal  of  a  state).  The  doctrine  concerning  education,  as  the  most  im 
portant  condition  of  this  best  state,  forms  the  conclusion.  5.  (Economics 
(olKovo(j.iKa),  in  two  books,  of  which  only  the  first  is  genuine. 


IV.    WORKS    ON    ART.1 


These  have  for  their  object  the  exercise  of  the  creative  faculty  or  art, 
and  to  them  belong  the  Poetics  and  Rhetoric.  1.  The  Poetics  (irepl  TTOITJTI- 
Krjs).  Aristotle  penetrated  more  deeply  than  any  of  the  ancients  into  the 
essence  of  Hellenic  art.  He  is  the  father  of  the  esthetics  of  poetry,  as  he 
is  the  completer  of  Greek  rhetoric  as  a  science.  The  greatest  part  of  the 
treatise  contains  a  theory  of  tragedy ;  nothing  else  is  treated  of,  with  the 
exception  of  the  epos  ;  comedy  is  merely  alluded  to.  The  treatise  itself 
is  undoubtedly  genuine,  but  the  explanation  of  its  present  form  is  still  a 
problem  of  criticism.  Some,  as,  for  instance,  G.  Hermann  and  Bern- 
hardy,  look  upon  it  as  the  first  sketch  of  an  uncompleted  work ;  others 
as  an  extract  from  a  larger  work ;  others,  again,  as  the  notes  taken  by 
some  hearer  of  lectures  delivered  by  Aristotle.  Thus  much,  however, 

1  Smith.  I.  c. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  335 

is  clear,  that  the  treatise,  as  we  have  it  at  present,  is  an  independent 
whole,  and,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  interpolations,  the  work  of  one 
author.  2.  The  Rhetoric  (TCX^T?  prj-ro/ufdj),  in  three  books.  Rhetoric,  as  a 
science,  according  to  Aristotle,  stands  side  by  side  with  dialectics.  The 
only  thing  which  makes  a  scientific  treatment  of  rhetoric  possible  is  the 
argumentation  which  awakens  conviction.  He,  therefore,  directs  his  chief 
attention  to  the  theory  of  oratorical  argumentation.  The  second  main 
division  of  the  work  treats  of  the  production  of  that  favorable  disposition 
in  the  hearer,  in  consequence  of  which  the  orator  appears  to  him  to  be 
worthy  of  credit.  The  third  part  treats  of  oratorical  expression  and  ar 
rangement. 

According  to  a  well-known  tradition,1  Aristotle  bequeathed  his  library 
and  MSS.  to  Theophrastus,  his  successor  in  the  Peripatetic  school.  On 
the  death  of  Theophrastus,  the  libraries  and  MSS.  of  both  Aristotle  and 
Theophrastus  are  said  to  have  come  into  the  hands  of  his  relation  and 
disciple,  Neleus  of  Scepsis,  in  Troas.  This  Neleus  sold  both  libraries  to 
Ptolemy  II.,  king  of  Egypt,  for  the  Alexandrean  library ;  but  he  retained 
for  himself,  as  an  heir-loom,  the  original  MSS.  of  the  works  of  these  two 
philosophers.  The  descendants  of  Neleus,  who  were  subjects  of  the 
King  of  Pergamus,  knew  of  no  other  way  of  securing  them  from  the 
search  of  the  Attali,  who  wished  to  rival  the  Ptolemies  in  forming  a 
large  library,  than  by  concealing  them  in  a  cellar  (Kara  yrjs  eV  Stdapvx't  TIVI), 
where,  for  a  couple  of  centuries,  they  were  exposed  to  the  ravages  of 
damp  and  worms.  It  was  not  till  the  beginning  of  the  century  before 
the  birth  of  Christ  that  a  wealthy  book-collector,  the  Athenian  Apellicon 
of  Teos,  traced  out  these  valuable  relics,  bought  them  from  the  ignorant 
heirs,  and  prepared  from  them  a  new  edition  of  Aristotle's  works,  caus 
ing  the  manuscripts  to  be  copied,  and  filling  up  the  gaps  and  making 
emendations,  but  without  sufficient  knowledge  of  what  he  was  about. 
After  the  capture  of  Athens,  Sulla,  in  B.C.  84,  confiscated  Apellicon's 
collection  of  books,  and  had  them  conveyed  to  Rome.  From  this  story 
an  error  arose,  which  has  been  handed  down  from  the  time  of  Strabo  to 
the  present  day.  It  was  concluded,  from  this  account,  that  neither  Aris 
totle  nor  Theophrastus  had  published  their  writings,  with  the  exception 
of  some  exoteric  works,  which  had  no  important  bearing  on  their  system, 
and  that  it  was  not  till  two  hundred  years  later  that  they  were  brought 
to  light  by  the  above-mentioned  Apellicon,  and  published  to  the  philosoph 
ical  world.  That,  however,  was  by  no  means  the  case.  Aristotle,  in 
deed,  did  not  prepare  a  complete  edition,  as  we  call  it,  of  his  writings. 
Nay,  it  is  certain  that  death  overtook  him  before  he  could  finish  some  of 
his  works,  and  put  the  finishing  hand  to  others.  Nevertheless,  it  can 
not  be  denied  that  Aristotle  destined  all  his  works  for  publication,  and 
published  several  in  his  lifetime.  This  is  indisputably  certain  with  re 
gard  to  the  exoteric  writings.  Those  which  had  not  been  published  by 
Aristotle  himself  were  given  to  the  world  by  Theophrastus  and  his  dis 
ciples  in  a  complete  form.2 

>  Strab.,  xiii.,  p.  608.  2  smith,  I.  c. 


336  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


LEADING     FEATURES     OF     ARISTOTLE'S     PHILOSOPHY.1 

We  can  not  fully  comprehend  the  peculiar  character  of  Aristotle's  doc 
trines  without  contrasting  them  with  those  of  Plato.  Plato  and  Aristotle 
occupy  the  central  place  in  the  philosophy  of  the  Greeks,  and  the  inves 
tigations  of  the  present  day  must  always  recur  to  them,  if  our  object  be 
to  ascertain  the  principles  by  which  we  may  form  a  view  of  the  whole 
of  things.  The  axis  around  which  philosophical  speculation  turns  is 
centered  in  the  minds  of  Plato  and  Aristotle.  The  investigations  of  the 
earlier  philosophers  reached  only  to  parts,  though  important  parts,  of  the 
universe,  and  they  regarded  these  parts  as  the  whole.  Pythagoras  made 
number  and  harmony  the  principle  of  his  philosophy  ;  the  Ionian  physical 
speculation  adopted  a  material  first  principle  ;  and  the  philosophy  of  Soc 
rates  had  for  its  basis  that  which  was  good  with  reference  to  man.  The 
greatness  of  Plato  and  Aristotle  consisted  in  binding  together  the  several 
parts  of  philosophy  in  one  governing  comprehensive  unity,  and  in  creating 
one  intellectual  antitype  of  the  Universal,  a  self-conscious  entirety  of 
thoughts — a  system  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  term.  Yet  they  con 
structed  their  respective  systems  from  a  different  point  of  view.  Plato's 
was  the  Ideal :  he  spiritualized  our  cognition.  Aristotle's  was  the  Real : 
he  established  it  on  realities.  Plato  contemplated  the  world  with  the 
eyes  of  the  Greek  artist,  and  he  clothed  his  conceptions  in  the  vesture 
of  the  beautiful :  his  ideas  are  the  spiritual  forms,  according  to  which 
God,  like  an  artificer,  fashions  the  world  and  all  things.  Aristotle  stripped 
off  this  vesture  :  he  sought  to  discover  the  notions  which  are  at  the  bot 
tom  of  all  sensuous  impressions,  and  these  notions  are  only  objects  of 
thought.  He  examined  facts,  and  endeavored  to  subject  them  to  the  no 
tion  which  we  have  of  them.  But  it  is  a  misrepresentation  to  say  that 
Aristotle  was  an  Empiric,  according  to  whom  the  mind  is  a  mere  tabula 
rasa,  on  which  experience,  sensation,  and  reflection  impress  ideas.  Ac 
cording  to  Aristotle,  the  understanding  is  also  that  creative  activity  which 
conceives  principles  and  apprehends  them  in  phenomena. 

Aristotle  is  an  unfathomable  intellect.  There  is  nothing  too  great  or 
too  small  for  his  observation  ;  nothing  which  his  understanding  could  not 
grasp.  He  not  only  mastered  all  the  sciences  of  his  day,  but  he  carried 
them  farther ;  he  extended  them  in  detail,  he  fitted  the  parts  together, 
and  formed  them  into  a  consistent  whole.  In  philosophy  we  observe  a 
two-fold  tendency,  which  is  seldom  united  in  the  same  person ;  a  tendency 
toward  the  infinite  variety  of  individual  things,  to  the  inexhaustible  mass 
of  material ;  and  the  opposite  tendency  to  the  universal  thought,  which 
masters  this  variety  and  pervades  this  mass.  Seldom,  if  ever,  have  these 
two  tendencies  been  so  nearly  balanced,  and  seldom  have  they  so  mutu 
ally  co-operated  with  each  other  as  in  Aristotle.  In  this  union  consists 
his  astonishing  greatness.  Plato  is  more  ideal,  but  Aristotle  more  uni 
versal.  In  the  writings  of  Plato,  the  genius  of  the  artist,  of  the  poet,  is 
always  felt ;  but  Aristotle  is  the  man  of  prose,  and  the  investigation  of 
bare  realities  is  his  province.  In  place  of  the  charm  of  plastic  art,  we 

i  Trentlelfnburg;  Eiog.  Dirt.,  Soc.  f7.  A".,  vol.  iii.,  p.  452. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  337 

find  in  Aristotle  greater  power  of  observation,  and  more  acute  analysis 
and  investigation.  In  nearly  all  the  sciences  Aristotle  opened  new  paths. 
He  created  Logic,  and  laid  down  the  laws  which  govern  our  conclu 
sions.  What  existed  before  his  time  was  no  more  than  unconnected  at 
tempts.  Kant  observes,  that  "  Logic,  since  the  time  of  Aristotle,  like 
pure  Geometry,  since  the  time  of  Euclid,  is  a  finished  science,  which  in 
all  essentials  has  received  neither  improvement  nor  alteration." 

With  profound  thought  he  investigated  the  nature  of  the  mind,  and  ex 
plained  its  development  in  his  wonderful  Psychology :  he  was  thus  the 
first  to  create  a  science  of  Mind.  In  his  Ethics  he  considered  new  ques 
tions,  as,  for  example,  the  freedom  of  the  will  and  responsibility.  Plato 
planned  the  ideal  of  a  state,  yet,  with  all  the  depth  of  his  philosophy,  he 
could  not  discover  the  means  of  adapting  his  ideal  to  real  life.  Aristotle 
examined  the  constitutions  and  positive  usages  of  existing  states  in  de 
tail,  and  with  his  mind  matured  by  this  practical  experience,  he  wrote  his 
"  Politic,"  in  which  work  he  examines  and  passes  judgment  on  existing 
political  forms,  according  to  their  several  internal  characters. 

Lastly,  by  his  investigation  of  ultimate  principles,  which  is  comprised 
in  his  "  First  Philosophy,"  he  gave  to  metaphysics  its  proper  direction. 
Aristotle's  method  is  characterized  by  sound  criticism  :  before  giving  his 
own  views,  he  never  neglects  to  examine  the  doctrines  of  his  predeces 
sors  in  philosophy.  He  shows  wherein  they  are  defective,  and  at  the 
same  time  states  how  far  they  are  true ;  and  thus  he  prepares  the  way 
for  his  own  theory.  This  peculiarity  makes  his  writings  an  authority  for 
the  history  of  philosophy,  and  Aristotle  may  be  considered  the  founder 
of  this  science  also.  Aristotle  does  not  belong  to  the  national  mind  of 
Greece.  The  period  of  genuine  Greek  antiquity,  which  has  perpetuated 
itself  in  the  beautiful  creations  of  poetry  and  eloquence,  of  sculpture  and 
architecture,  was  already  past,  and  Aristotle  could  only  contemplate  it  at 
a  distance  ;  he  reflects  upon  it  as  on  a  subject  foreign  to  his  age.  The 
whole  direction  of  his  philosophy  is  rather  toward  that  which  belongs  to 
mankind  in  general,  and  to  the  rational,  than  to  that  which  is  peculiarly 
Greek.  This  character  of  universality  made  Aristotle's  works  intelligible 
even  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  it  rendered  his  philosophy  susceptible  of  an 
intimate  union  with  Christian  theology.1 

EDITIONS    OF    ARISTOTLE. 

The  most  important  editions  of  the  entire  works  of  Aristotle  are  the  following :  1.  The 
editio  princeps,  by  Aldus  Pius  Manutius,  Venice,  1495-98,  5  vols.  fol.  (called,  also,  Aldina 
major).  For  the  criticism  of  the  text,  this  is  still  the  most  important  of  all  the  old  edi 
tions.  2.  The  third  Basle  edition,  1550,  2  vols.  fol.,  with  several  variations  from,  and 
some  essential  improvements  upon,  the  editio  princeps.  The  first  and  second  Basle  edi 
tions,  which  appeared  in  1531  and  1539,  are  nothing  but  reprints  of  the  editio  princeps. 

3.  The  edition  of  Qamotius,  sometimes  called  Aldina  minor,  Venice,  1551-53,  6  vols.  8vo. 

4.  The  edition  of  Sylburgius,  Frankfort,  1584-87,  11  vols.  4to.     This  edition  surpassed 
all  the  previous  ones,  and  even  the  critics  of  the  present  day  can  not  dispense  with  it. 

5.  The  edition  of  Isaac  Casaubon,  Leyden,  1590,  2  vols.  fol.,  reprinted  in  1597,  1605, 1646. 
This  is  the  first  Greek  and  Latin  edition  of  the  entire  works  of  Aristotle,  but  prepared 
hastily,  and  now  worthless.     The  same  may  be  said  of,  6.  The  edition  of  Du  Val,  Paris, 

*  Trendelenlmrg,  I.  c. 
P 


G  R  E  E  K     L  IT  E  R  A  T  U  R  E. 

1619  and  1629,  2  vols.  fol. ;  1639,  4  vols.  fol.  Much  more  important  is,  7.  The  Bipont 
edition  (not  completed),  by  Buhle,  1791-1800,  5  vols.  8vo.  It  contains  only  the  Orga- 
non,  and  the  rhetorical  and  poetical  writings.  The  continuation  was  prevented  by  the 
conflagration  of  Moscow,  in  which  Buhle  lost  the  materials  which  he  had  collected. 
The  first  volume,  which  contains,  among  other  things,  a  most  copious  enumeration  of 
all  the  earlier  editions,  translations,  and  commentaries,  is  of  great  literary  value.  The 
critical  remarks  contain  chiefly  the  variations  of  older  editions.  Little  is  done  in  it  for 
criticism  itself  and  exegesis.  8.  The  edition  of  Bekker,  Berlin,  1831-40,  4  vols.  4to.  The 
text  is  in  two  volumes,  the  Latin  translation  occupies  a  third  volume,  and  the  fourth  is 
a  volume  of  scholia,  edited  by  Brandis,  which  is  to  be  followed  by  another  volume  of 
scholia  that  has  not  yet  appeared.  This  is  the  first  edition  founded  on  a  diligent,  though 
not  always  complete  comparison  of  ancient  MSS.  It  forms  the  commencement  of  a  new 
era  for  the  criticism  of  the  text  of  Aristotle.  Unfortunately,  there  is  still  no  notice  given 
of  the  MSS.  made  use  of,  and  of  the  course  in  consequence  pursued  by  the  editor,  which 
occasions  great  difficulty  in  making  a  critical  use  of  this  edition.  The  text  of  Bekker's 
edition  has  been  reprinted  at  Oxford,  in  11  vols.  8vo,  with  the  indices  of  Sylburg.  Be 
sides  these,  there  is  a  stereotype  edition  published  by  Tauchnitz,  Leipzig,  1832,  16  vols. 
16mo,  but  it  is  an  uncritical  one,  and  the  pointing  is  so  bad  as  to  destroy  the  sense.  The 
very  same  text  has  been  repeated  under  the  title  of  a  new  edition:  " Aristotelis  Opera 
Omnia  qua  exstant.  Cura  Car.  Herm.  Weise,"  Leipzig,  1841,  &c.,  1  vol.  4to.  What  is  add 
ed  upon  the  order  of  Aristotle's  Avritings  shows  a  want  of  all  sound  knowledge  of  the 
subject,  and  it  is  incredible  how  such  a  production  could  venture  to  make  its  appearance 
in  Germany  after  Bekker's  edition.1 

The  most  important  editions  of  the  separate,  works  are  as  follows :  Aristotelis  Orga- 
non,  by  Pacius,  with  an  analytical  commentary,  Frankfort,  1597, 4to  ;  by  Bekker,  Berlin, 
1843,  2  vols.  8vo ;  best  edition  by  Waitz,  Leipzig,  1844-46,  2  vols.  8vo.  Metaphysica, 
with  critical  text,  by  Brandis,  in  "Aristotelis  et  Theophrasti  Metaphysica,"  &c.,  ed.  C.  A. 
Brandis,  Berlin,  1823,  1  vol. ;  the  "  Scholia  Grceca  in  Aristot.  Metaphysica,"  by  Brandis, 
Berlin,  1837,  form  the  second  part  to  this  edition  ;  with  a  German  translation,  and  copi 
ous  commentary  by  Schwegler,  Tiibingen,  1846-48,  3  vols.  8vo ;  with  critical  text  and 
commentary  by  Bonitz,  Bonn,  1848-49,  2  vols.  8vo.  Of  the  Mathematics,  Aristotelis  Trepl 
aTOjuwj'  •ya/u.juwi',  by  H.  Stephens,  Paris,  1557,  8vo ;  and  the  MijxaviKa,  by  Van  Capelle, 
Amsterdam,  1812.  Of  the  Physics,  Aristotelis  Physica,  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1843  ;  De  Cce- 
lo,  by  Morelli,  Lyon,  1563 ;  and  by  Havenreuter,  Frankfort,  1605.  Hepi  -yeveVeo)?  KOI 
</>0o/»a?,  Venice,  1520,  fol. ;  by  Pacius,  Frankfort,  1601,  with  the  books  De  Ccelo  and  oth 
ers.  Of  the  Meteorologica,  by  Vicomeratus,  Paris,  1556  ;  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1832,  8vo  ; 
by  Ideler,  with  Latin  version  and  a  learned  commentary,  Leipzig,  1834-36,  2  vols.  8vo. 

Of  the  Historia  Animalium,  with  the  commentary  of  Scaliger  and  translation  of  Maus- 
sac,  Toulouse,  1619,  fol. ;  by  Camus,  with  French  translation,  Paris,  1783,  2  vols.  4to ; 
by  Schneider,  Leipzig,  1811,  4  vols.  8vo;  and  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1832,  8vo.  Of  the  De 
Anima,  by  Pacius,  Frankfort,  1596,  8vo  ;  by  Trendelenburg,  Jena,  1633,  8vo  ;  the  De  An- 
ima,  De  Sensu,  De  Memoria,  and  several  minor  treatises,  by  Eekker,  Berlin,  1829,  8vo. 
Of  the  De  Coloribus,  by  Portius,  Florence,  1548,  4to.  Of  the  Physiognomica,  in  Frantz's 
Scriptores  Physiognomici  Veteres,  Altenburg,  1780,  8vo.  Of  the  noAtretai,  or  constitu 
tions  of  states,  &c.,  the  fragments  by  Neumann,  Heidelberg,  1827, 12mo.  Of  the  Ethics, 
Ethica  Nicomachea,  by  Wilkinson,  Oxford,  1715,  4th  ed.,  1818,  8vo  ;  by  Zell,  Heidelberg, 
1820,  2  vols.  8vo;  by  Coraes,  Paris,  1822,  8vo ;  by  Cardwell,  Oxford,  1828,  2  vols.  8vo , 
by  Miohelet,  Berlin,  1828-35,  2  vols.  8vo,  2d  ed.,  1848;  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1845;  Ethica 
Eudemia  (sive  Eudemi  Rhodii  Ethica),  by  Fritzsche,  Ratisbon,  1851, 8vo.  Of  the  Politica, 
by  Schneider,  Frankfort  on  the  Oder,  1809,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  by  Coraes,  Paris,  1821,  8vo  ;  by 
Gottling,  Jena,  1824;  by  Stahr,  with  a  German  version,  Leipzig,  1837;  by  Barthelemy 
St.  Hilaire,  with  a  French  translation,  Paris,  1837.  Of  the  Rhetoric,  by  Victorius, 
Basle,  1549,  fol. ;  Oxford,  1759,  without  accents,  8vo  ;  by  Reiz,  Leipzig,  1772,  8vo  ;  with  a 
Latin  version  and  commentary,  Oxford,  1820,  2  vols.  8vo ;  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1843,  8vo. 
Of  the  Poetics,  by  Robortellus,  Florence,  1548,  fol. ;  by  Heinsius,  1610,  1611 ;  by  Tyr- 
whitt,  Oxford,  1794,  4to  and  8vo ;  by  G.  Hermann,  Leipzig,  1802,  8vo ;  by  Graefenhan, 
Leipzig,  1821,  8vo ;  by  F.  Ritter,  Cologne,  1839 ;  and  by  Bekker,  with  the  Rhetoric,  Ber 
lin,  1832,  8vo.  Of  the  De  Admirandis  Narrationibus,  by  Beckmann,  Gottingen,  1786, 4to  ; 

i  Ponitz,  DIP  Neue  Jenaische  JAteralurzntung.  1842. 


ATTIC     PERIOD,  339 

and  by  Westermann,  in  the  Paradoxographi  Graeci,  Brunswick,  1839.    Of  the  (Economic- 
us,  by  Schneider,  Leipzig,  1815,  8vo  ;  by  Goettling,  Jena,  1830. 


II.  THEOPHRASTUS  (QeJ^pao-ros),1  a  celebrated  Greek  philosopher,  and 
the  successor  of  Aristotle  in  the  Peripatetic  school,  was  a  native  of  Ere- 
sus,  in  Lesbos,2  and  studied  philosophy  at  Athens,  first  under  Plato,  and 
afterward  under  Aristotle.3  He  became  the  favorite  pupil  of  Aristotle, 
who  is  said  to  have  changed  his  original  name  of  Tyrtamus  to  Theo- 
phrastus  (or  the  Divine  speaker),  to  indicate  the  fluent  and  graceful  ad 
dress  of  his  pupil  ;*  but  the  story  is  scarcely  credible.  It  is  much  more 
likely  that  the  proper  name  itself,  which  occurs  elsewhere,5  suggested 
the  idea  of  connecting  it  with  the  eloquence  which  so  eminently  distin 
guished  the  Eresian.  Aristotle  named  Theophrastus  his  successor  in  the 
presidency  of  the  Lyceum,  and  in  his  will  bequeathed  to  him  his  library 
and  the  originals  of  his  own  writings.  Theophrastus  was  a  worthy  suc 
cessor  of  his  great  master,  and  nobly  sustained  the  character  of  the  school. 
He  is  said  to  have  had  two  thousand  disciples,  and  among  them  such 
men  as  the  comic  poet  Menander.6  He  was  highly  esteemed  by  the  kings 
Philippus,  Cassander,  and  Ptolemy,  and  was  not  the  less  an  object  of  re 
gard  to  the  Athenian  people,  as  was  decisively  shown  when  Agonis  ven 
tured  to  bring  an  impeachment  against  him  on  the  ground  of  impiety  ;7 
for  he  was  not  only  acquitted,  but  his  accuser  would  have  fallen  a  victim 
to  his  calumny,  had  not  Theophrastus  generously  interfered  to  save  him. 
Nevertheless,  when  the  philosophers  were  banished  from  Athens,  in  B.C. 
305,  according  to  the  law  of  Sophocles,  Theophrastus  also  left  the  city, 
until  Philo,  a  disciple  of  Aristotle,  in  the  very  next  year,  brought  Sopho 
cles  to  punishment,  and  procured  the  repeal  of  the  law.8  From  this  time 
Theophrastus  continued  to  teach  at  Athens  without  any  farther  molesta 
tion  till  his  death.  He  died  in  B.C.  287,  after  having  presided  over  the 
Lyceum  about  thirty-five  years.  His  age  is  differently  stated.  Accord 
ing  to  some  accounts,  he  lived  eighty-five  years  ;9  according  to  others, 
one  hundred  and  seven  years.  He  is  said  to  have  closed  his  life  with 
the  complaint  respecting  the  short  duration  of  human  existence,  that  it 
ended  just  when  the  insight  into  its  problems  was  beginning.  The  whole 
population  of  Athens  took  part  in  his  funeral  obsequies.  He  bequeathed 
his  library  to  Neleus  of  Scepsis. 

Theophrastus  exerted  himself  to  carry  out  the  philosophical  system  of 
Aristotle,  to  throw  light  upon  the  difficulties  contained  in  his  books,  and 
to  fill  up  the  gaps  in  them.  With  this  view  he  wrote  a  great  number  of 
works,  the  main  object  of  which  was  the  development  of  the  Aristotelian 
philosophy.  Unfortunately,  most  of  them  have  perished.  The  following 
are  alone  extant  :  1.  Characters  ('HOiitol  x^paKTripes),  in  thirty  chapters, 
containing  descriptions  of  vicious  or  ridiculous  characters.  Schneider, 
one  of  the  editors  of  Theophrastus,  has  been  led  to  form  the  opinion  that 
the  "  Characters,"  as  we  now  have  them,  are  only  extracts  from  different 

1  Smith,  I.  c.  2  strab.,  xiii.,  p.  618.  3  Diog.  Laert.,  v.,  36,  seqq. 

*  Strab.,  1.  c.;  Diog.  Laert.,  v.,  38;  Cic.,  Orat.,  19.          *  Steph.,  Thesaur.  Ling.  Grose. 
c  Diog.  Laert.,  v.,  36,  seq.  7  ja.  it.  •  JElian,  V.  H.,  iv.,  19. 

8  Ding.  Laert.,  v.,  38  ;  Menag.  ad  l<yc.  »  Id.,  v.,  40. 


340  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

moral  works  published  by  the  philosophers,  and  extracts,  too,  made  at 
different  times  and  by  different  persons.  This  opinion,  however,  has 
found  many  opponents.  More  unanimity  prevails  among  critics  relative 
to  the  spuriousness  of  the  preface.  The  "  Characters"  stand  very  high 
as  a  classic  work,  on  account  of  the  purity  and  precision  of  the  style,  and 
the  exactness  and  fidelity  of  the  portraits.  Among  their  numerous  imi 
tators,  La  Bruyere  stands  most  conspicuous.  2.  A  Treatise  on  sensuous 
perception  and  its  objects  (Uepl  aiV07j<re«s  Kal  alffQ^ruf).  3.  A  fragment 
of  a  work  on  metaphysics  (ruv  ^era  ra  <pu<n/ca).  4.  On  the  History  of 
Plants  (Uepl  QVTWV  t(rropias),in  nine  books,  with  a  fragment  of  a  tenth,  one 
of  the  earliest  works  on  Botany  that  have  come  down  to  us.  As  the 
philosopher  of  Stagira  is  the  father  of  Zoology,  so  is  Theophrastus  to  be 
regarded  as  the  parent  of  Botany.  His  vegetable  physiology  contains 
some  very  just  arrangements  :  he  had  even  a  glimpse  of  the  sexual  sys 
tem  of  plants.  5.  On  the  Causes  of  Plants  (Uepl  $\n<av  amwj/),  originally  in 
eight  books,  of  which  only  six  have  come  down  to  us.  It  is  a  system  of 
botanical  physiology.  6.  Of  Stones  (Uepl  xiQuv).  This  work  proves  that, 
after  the  time  of  Theophrastus,  mineralogy  retrograded.  We  have  also 
other  treatises  of  his  on  Odors,  Winds,  Prognostics  of  the  Weather,  &c.  All 
these  fragments  have  been  preserved  for  us  by  Photius. 

Of  the  earlier  editions  of  the  entire  works  of  Theophrastus  we  may  mention  the  Al- 
dine,  Venice,  1498,  fol.  ;  that  of  Basle,  1541,  fol.  ;  and  that  by  D.  Heinsius,  Leyden,  1613, 
fol.  Much  superior,  however,  to  the  older  ones  is  that  by  Schneider,  Leipzig,  1818-21, 
5  vols.  8vo.  Still,  this  needs  itself  a  careful  revision,  since  the  piecemeal  manner  in 
which  the  critical  apparatus  came  into  Schneider's  hands,  and  his  own  ill  health,  com 
pelled  him  to  append  supplements  and  corrections,  twice  or  thrice,  to  the  text  and  com 
mentary.  Wimmer  has  published  the  first  volume  of  a  new  and  much  improved  edition 
of  Theophrastus,  containing  the  history  of  plants,  Breslau,  1842,  8vo.  No  other  volumes, 
however,  have  as  yet  appeared.  Of  the  separate  works,  we  may  mention  the  following 
editions  :  the  Characteres,  by  Needham,  Cambridge,  1712,  8vo  ;  by  Fischer,  Coburg,  1763, 
8vo,  one  of  the  best  ;  by  Goez,  Nuremburg,  1798,  8vo  ;  by  Schneider,  Jena,  1799,  8vo  ;  by 
Coraes,  Paris,  1799,  8vo  ;  by  Ast,  Leipzig,  1816,  8vo.  The  History  of  Plants,  by  Bodaeus 
a  Stapel,  Amsterdam,  1644,  fol.  ;  by  Stackhouse,  Oxford,  1813,  2  vols.  8vo  ;  and  by  Wim 
mer,  mentioned  above.  On  Stones,  by  De  Laet,  Leyden,  1647,  8vo  ;  and  by  Hill,  with  an 
English  version  and  notes,  London,  1746,  8vo. 


III.  STEATON  (Sr/jdtTcov),1  of  Lampsacus,  a  distinguished  Peripatetic  phi 
losopher,  and  tutor  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  succeeded  Theophrastus  as 
head  of  the  school  in  B.C.  288,  and,  after  presiding  over  it  eighteen  years, 
was  succeeded  by  Lycon*  He  devoted  himself  especially  to  the  study 
of  natural  science,  whence  he  obtained,  or,  as  it  appears  from  Cicero, 
himself  assumed  the  appellation  of  ^uo-i/c<Js  (Physicus*).  Cicero,  while 
speaking  highly  of  his  .talents,  blames  him  for  neglecting  the  most  neces 
sary  part  of  his  philosophy,  that  which  has  respect  to  virtue  and  morals, 
and  giving  himself  up  to  the  investigation  of  nature.3  In  the  long  list  of 
his  works  given  by  Diogenes,  several  of  the  titles  are  upon  subjects  of 
moral  philosophy,  but  the  great  majority  belong  to  the  department  of 
physical  science.  From  the  few  notices  of  his  tenets  which  we  find  in 
the  ancient  writers,  Straton  appears  to  have  held  a  pantheistic  system,  the 
specific  character  of  which,  however,  can  not  be  determined.  He  seems 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr,  s.  v.      2  Diog.  Latrt.,\.,  58.      3  Acpd.  Quant.,  i.,  9  ;  DC  Fin.,  v.,  5. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  341 

to  have  denied  the  existence  of  any  god  out  of  the  material  universe,  and 
to  have  held  that  every  particle  of  matter  has  a  plastic  and  seminal  pow 
er,  but  without  sensation  or  intelligence ;  and  that  life,  sensation,  and 
intellect  are  but  forms,  accidents,  and  affections  of  matter.  Some  mod 
ern  writers  have  regarded  Straton  as  a  forerunner  of  Spinoza,  while  oth 
ers  see  in  his  system  an  anticipation  of  the  hypothesis  of  monads.  He 
has  been  charged  with  atheism  by  Cudworth,  Leibnitz,  Bayle,  and  other 
distinguished  writers,  and  warmly  defended  by  Schlosser,  in  his  Spicilcg- 
ium  historico-philosophicum  de  Stratone  Lampsaceno,  &c.,  Vitemberg,  1728, 
4to.  For  an  account  of  the  controversy  to  which  the  tenets  of  Straton 
have  given  rise  among  modern  scholars,  the  student  should  consult  Har- 
less,  in  his  edition  of  Fabricius.  Compare,  also,  Nauwerck,  De  Stratone 
Lampsaceno  Phil.  Disquis.,  Berlin,  1836,  8vo. 

The  heads  of  the  Peripatetic  school  who  followed  Theophrastus  and 
Straton,  namely,  Lycon,  Ariston  of  Ceos,  Critolaus,  &c.,  were  of  less  im 
portance,  and  seem  to  have  occupied  themselves  more  in  carrying  out 
some  separate  dogmas,  and  commenting  on  the  works  of  Aristotle.  At 
tention  was  especially  directed  to  a  popular  rhetorical  system  of  ethics. 
The  school  declined  in  splendor  and  influence ;  the  more  abstruse  writ 
ings  of  Aristotle  were  neglected,  because  their  form  was  not  sufficiently 
pleasing,  and  the  easy  superficiality  of  the  school  was  deterred  by  the 
difficulty  of  unfolding  them.  Thus  the  expression  of  the  master  himself 
respecting  his  writings  might  have  been  repeated,  "  that  they  had  been 
published,  and  yet  not  published."  Extracts  and  anthologies  arose,  and 
satisfied  the  superficial  wants  of  the  school,  while  the  works  of  Aristotle 
himself  were  thrust  into  the  background.  In  Rome,  before  the  time  of 
Cicero,  we  find  only  slender  traces  of  an  acquaintance  with  the  writings 
and  philosophical  system  of  Aristotle.  They  only  came  there  with  the 
library  of  Apellicon,  which  Sulla,  as  we  have  said,  had  carried  off  from 
Greece. 

X.     THE     STOIC     SCHOOL. 

I.  ZENO  (Z^j/wv),1  the  celebrated  founder  of  the  Stoic  philosophy,  was 
a  native  of  Citium,  in  Cyprus.  He  began  at  an  early  age  to  study  phi 
losophy  through  the  writings  of  the  Socratics,  which  his  father,  who  was 
a  merchant,  was  accustomed  to  bring  back  from  Athens  when  he  went 
thither  on  trading  voyages.  At  the  age  of  twenty-two,  or,  according  to 
others,  of  thirty  years,  having  been,  while  pursuing  the  vocation  of  his 
father,  shipwrecked  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  Pireeeus,2  Zeno  was  led 
to  settle  in  Athens,  and  to  devote  himself  entirely  to  the  study  of  philos 
ophy.  According  to  some  writers,  he  lost  all  his  property  in  the  ship 
wreck  ;  according  to  others,  he  still  retained  a  large  fortune  ;3  but,  which 
ever  of  these  accounts  is  correct,  his  moderation  and  contentment  be 
came  proverbial,  and  a  recognition  of  his  virtues  shines  through  even  the 
ridicule  of  the  comic  poets.  The  weakness  of  his  health  is  said  to  have 
first  determined  him  to  live  rigorously  and  simply ;  but  his  desire  to  make 
himself  independent  of  all  external  circumstances  chiefly  led  him  to 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Diog.  Laert.,  vii.,  2,  seqq.  3  Id,,  vii.s  13, 


342  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

attach  himself  to  the  Cynic  Crates.  In  opposition  to  the  advice  of  Crat 
es,  he  studied  under  Stilpo,  of  the  Megaric  school ;  and  he  subsequently 
received  instruction  from  the  two  other  contemporary  Megarics,  Diodo- 
rus  Cronus  and  Philo,  and  from  the  Academics  Xenocrates  and  Polemo. 
The  period  which  Zeno  thus  devoted  to  study  is  said  to  have  extended 
to  twenty  years.  At  its  close,  and  after  he  had  developed  his  peculiar 
philosophical  system,  he  opened  his  school  in  the  porch  (<rroa,  stoa) 
adorned  with  the  paintings  of  Polygnotus,  and  hence  denominated  crroa 
TroiKiXT)  (Stoa  Poecile),  which,  at  an  earlier  period,  had  been  a  place  where 
poets  met.1  From  this  place  his  disciples  were  called  2Ta>iW,  or  of  e'/c 
TTJS  a-Toas,  that  is,  Stoics,  or  men  of  the  porch.  They  were  previously 
styled  Zenonians. 

Among  the  warm  admirers  of  Zeno  was  Antigonus  Gonatas,  king  of 
Macedonia ;  and  he  is  said  also  to  have  attracted  the  attention  of  the  Egyp 
tian  monarch  Ptolemy.  Much  more  honorable,  however,  was  the  confi 
dence  and  esteem  which  the  Athenians  showed  toward  him,  stranger  as 
he  was ;  for  although  the  well-known  story  that  they  deposited  the  keys 
of  the  Acropolis  with  him,  as  the  most  trustworthy  man,2  may  be  a  later 
invention,  there  seems  no  reason  for  doubting  the  authenticity  of  the  de 
cree  of  the  people,  by  which  a  golden  crown  and  a  public  burial  in  the 
Ceramicus  were  awarded  to  him,  because,  during  his  long  residence  in 
Athens,  by  his  doctrines,  and  his  life  spent  in  accordance  with  them,  he 
had  conducted  the  young  men  who  attached  themselves  to  him  along  the 
path  of  virtue  and  discretion.  The  Athenian  citizenship,  however,  he  is 
said  to  have  declined,  that  he  might  not  become  unfaithful  to  his  native 
land,  where,  in  return,  he  was  highly  esteemed.  We  do  not  know  the 
year  either  of  Zeno's  birth  or  death.  He  is  said  to  have  presided  over 
his  school  for  fifty-eight  years,  and  to  have  died  at  the  age  of  ninety- 
eight.  He  was  still  alive,  according  to  the  ordinary  account,  in  B.C.  260. 

Zeno  wrote  numerous  works  ;  but  the  writings  of  Chrysippus  and  the 
later  Stoics  seem  to  have  obscured  those  of  Zeno,  and  even  the  warm 
adherents  of  the  school  appear  seldom  to  have  gone  back  to  the  books  of 
its  founder.  Hence  it  is  difficult  to  ascertain  how  much  of  the  later  Stoic 
philosophy  really  belongs  to  Zeno.  His  successors  in  the  Stoic  school 
were  as  follows  :  Cleanthes,  Chrysippus,  Zeno  of  Tarsus,  Diogenes  of  Bab 
ylon,  Antipater  of  Tarsus,  Pancetius  of  Rhodes,  and  Posidonius. 

Zeno's  doctrines  were  mainly  directed  to  the  moral  part  of  philosophy, 
and  he  approached  nearer  to  the  Cynics  than  his  followers.  It  would  ap 
pear,  from  the  fact  of  his  disciples  separating  into  different  parties,  that 
his  system  was  either  not  completely  developed,  or  that  it  possessed  too 
little  originality  to  unite  all  his  followers.  Chrysippus  is  said  to  have 
been  the  one  who  gave  to  the  Stoical  system  its  full  development,  and 
fixed  its  doctrines  ;  and  hence  the  saying,  "  If  there  had  been  no  Chrysip 
pus,  there  would  have  been  no  Stoa."  The  Stoics  made  three  divisions 
of  philosophy,  which  Plutarch  calls  the  Physical,  Ethical,  and  Logical 
(Xo-yiK6v\  of  which,  however,  our  word  Logical  is  not  a  translation.  But 
other  Stoics  made  different  divisions.  The  triple  division  was  made  by 
i  Diog.  Laert.,  vij.,  5.  3  Id.,  vii.,  6. 


A  T  TIC     PERIOD. 

Zeno  himself.  The  logical  part  of  the  Stoical  system  comprehended  their 
metaphysics.  They  made  a  distinction  between  truth  (dATjfleta)  and  true 
(aATjfle's) ;  truth  implied  body  (ovS/wi),  but  true  was  without  body,  and  was 
merely  in  opinion.  They  attributed  to  things  an  absolute  existence  in 
themselves.  Their  system,  so  far  as  we  can  learn  what  it  was,  was  ob 
scure,  and  they  were  certainly  not  well  agreed  among  themselves  on  their 
metaphysical  doctrines.  They  cultivated  logic,  rhetoric,  and  grammar. 
In  their  physical  doctrines  they  assumed  two  first  principles,  the  Active 
and  the  Passive.  The  Passive  was  ov<ria,  or  matter,  the  first  substance 
of  which  all  things  were  made ;  the  Active  was  God,  who  was  one, 
though  called  by  many  names.  The  universal  belief  in  a  Deity,  or  in 
many  deities,  they  considered  one  of  the  evidences  of  God's  existence.1 

All  the  universe,  says  Seneca,  according  to  our  Stoical  doctrines,  con 
sists  of  two  things,  cause  and  matter.  The  cause,  which  puts  matter  in 
motion,  is  conceived  as  pervading  it,  but  it  is  rational ;  the  motions  pro 
duced  are  not  the  effect  of  chance,  and  all  the  harmony  and  beauty  of  the 
visible  world  are  a  proof  of  design.  It  followed  from  their  general  doc 
trines  that  the  soul  (fyvx'f))  is  corporeal,  for  they  defined  all  things  to  be 
body,  which  produce  any  thing  or  are  produced.  They  argued  thus  :  noth 
ing  that  is  without  body  sympathizes  with  body,  nor  does  body  sympa 
thize  with  that  which  is  not  body,  but  only  body  with  body.  The  body 
and  the  soul  sympathize,  for  they  are  both  bodies.  Death  is  the  separa 
tion  of  the  soul  and  the  body.  The  soul  is  a  spirit  (irv^v^a)  that  is  born 
with  us  ;  consequently  it  is  body,  and  it  continues  after  death  ;  still,  it  is 
perishable  ;  but  the  soul  of  all  things,  of  which  the  souls  of  animals  are 
parts,  is  imperishable.  As  to  the  duration  of  the  soul  there  were  differ 
ent  opinions  :  Cleanthes  thought  that  all  souls  lasted  to  the  general  con 
flagration  ;  Chrysippus  thought  that  the  souls  of  the  wise  only  lasted  so 
long.2 

The  ethical  doctrines  of  the  Stoics  have  attracted  most  attention  as 
exhibited  in  the  lives  of  distinguished  Greeks  and  Romans.  To  live  ac 
cording  to  nature  was  the  basis  of  their  ethical  system  ;  but  by  this  it 
was  not  meant  that  a  man  should  follow  his  own  particular  nature ;  he 
must  make  his  life  conformable  to  the  nature  of  the  whole  of  things. 
This  principle  is  the  foundation  of  all  morality  ;  and  it  follows  that  moral 
ity  is  connected  with  philosophy.  To  know  what  is  our  relation  to  the 
whole  of  things,  is  to  know  wrhat  wTe  ought  to  be  and  to  do.  To  live  ac 
cording  to  nature  is  virtue,  and  virtue  is  itself  happiness.  Every  man 
having  within  himself  a  capacity  of  discerning  and  following  the  law  of 
nature,  has  his  happiness  in  his  own  power,  and  is  a  divinity  to  himself. 
Wisdom  consists  in  distinguishing  good  from  evil.  Good  is  that  which 
produces  happiness  according  to  the  nature  of  a  rational  being.  As  the 
order  of  the  world  consists  in  an  invariable  conformity  to  the  law  of  fate, 
so  the  happiness  of  man  is  that  course  of  life  which  flows  in  an  uninter 
rupted  current  according  to  the  law  of  nature.  Since  those  things  alone 
are  truly  good  which  are  becoming  and  virtuous,  and  since  virtue,  which 
is  seate_d  in  the  mind,  is  alone  sufficient  for  happiness,  external  things 
i  Smith,  I.  c.  2  Id.  ib. 


344  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

contribute  nothing  toward  happiness,  and  therefore  are  not  in  themselves 
good.  The  wise  man  will  only  value  riches,  honor,  beauty,  and  other 
external  enjoyments  as  means  and  instruments  of  virtue ;  for,  in  every 
condition,  he  is  happy  in  the  possession  of  a  mind  accommodated  to  na 
ture.  Pain,  which  does  not  belong  to  the  mind,  is  no  evil.  The  wise 
man  will  be  happy  in  the  midst  of  torture.  All  external  things  are  in 
different,  since  they  can  not  affect  the  happiness  of  man ;  nevertheless, 
some  of  these  are  conducive,  others  unfavorable  to  the  life  which  is  ac 
cording  to  nature,  and,  as  such,  are  proper  objects  of  preference  or  re 
jection,  Trpotiy^va.  3)  aTroTrporjy^eVa.  Every  virtue  being  a  conformity  to 
nature,  and  every  vice  a  deviation  from  it,  all  virtues  and  vices  are  equal.1 

The  Stoics  advanced  many  extravagant  assertions  concerning  their 
wise  man.  For  example,  that  he  feels  neither  pain  nor  pleasure ;  that 
he  exercises  no  pity ;  that  he  is  free  from  faults  ;  that  he  is  divine  ;  that 
he  can  neither  deceive  nor  be  deceived ;  that  he  does  all  things  well ; 
that  he  alone  is  noble,  great,  ingenuous ;  that  he  alone  is  free  ;  that  he  is 
a  prophet,  a  priest,  a  king,  and  the  like.  These  paradoxical  vauntings 
are  humorously  ridiculed  by  Horace.  In  order,  however,  to  conceive  the 
true  notion  of  the  Stoics  concerning  their  wise  man,  it  must  be  clearly 
understood  that  they  did  not  suppose  such  a  man  actually  to  exist,  but 
that  they  framed  in  their  imagination  an  image  of  perfection,  toward 
which  every  man  should  continually  aspire.  All  the  extravagant  things 
which  are  to  be  met  with  in  their  writings  on  this  subject  may  be  refer 
red  to  their  general  principle  of  the  entire  sufficiency  of  virtue  to  happi 
ness,  and  the  consequent  indifference  of  all  external  circumstances.  It 
is  one  of  the  boasts  of  the  Stoics  that  their  wise  man  is  perfectly  free, 
and  can  do  whatever  he  pleases  without  restraint  or  compulsion ;  and 
yet  nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  they  understood  this  freedom  to 
consist  merely  in  the  superiority  of  virtue  to  all  external  circumstances  ; 
for,  according  to  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  the  Porch,  the  human  mind 
is  bound  by  the  indissoluble  chain  of  nature,  and  subject  to  the  eternal 
law  of  fate  ;  and  all  human  actions  are  a  necessary  consequence  of  that 
order,  by  which  all  beings  in  nature  are  irresistibly  impelled. 2 

For  a  fuller  exposition  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Stoics,  the  student  is  re 
ferred  to  the  article  on  Zeno  by  Braridis,  in  Smith's  Dictionary  of  Biog 
raphy,  and  to  the  works  of  Brucker  (Hist.  Grit.  Philosoph.,  pt.  ii.,  book  ii., 
ch.  ix.,  p.  893,  seqq.)  and  Ritter  (Hist.  Philos.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  449,  seqq.,  Eng. 
transl.)- — It  remains  to  give  a  brief  notice  of  Cleanthes  and  Chrysippus, 
reserving  Panatius  and  Posidonius  for  the  Roman  period. 

II.  CLEANTHES  (K\eai>07?s)J  was  a  native  of  Assos,  in  Troas,  and  born 
about  B.C.  300.  He  entered  life  as  a  boxer,  but  had  only  four  drachmas 
of  his  own  when  he  felt  himself  impelled  to  the  study  of  philosophy.  He 
first  placed  himself  under  Crates,  and  then  under  Zeno,  whose  faithful 
disciple  he  continued  for  nineteen  years.  In  order  to  support  himself  and 
pay  Zeno  the  necessary  fee  for  his  instructions,  he  worked  all  night  at 
drawing  water,  as  a  common  laborer,  in  the  public  gardens ;  but  as  he 
spent  the  whole  day  in  philosophical  pursuits,  and  had  no  visible  means 
i  Enfold,  Hist.  Philos.,  vol.  i.,  p.  346.  »  Id.  ib.,  p.  347.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  345 

of  support,  he  was  summoned  before  the  Areopagus  to  give  an  account 
of  his  manner  of  living.  The  judges  were  so  delighted  by  the  evidence 
of  industry  which  he  produced,  that  they  voted  him  ten  minae,  though 
Zeno  would  not  permit  him  to  accept  them.  He  was  naturally  slow,  but 
his  iron  industry  overcame  all  difficulties ;  and,  on  the  death  of  Zeno, 
Cleanthes  succeeded  him  in  his  school.  He  died  about  B.C.  220,  at  the 
age  of  eighty,  of  voluntary  starvation.  His  physician  had  recommended 
him  to  abstain  from  food  two  days,  in  order  to  cure  an  ulcer  in  his  mouth, 
and  at  the  end  of  the  second  day  he  said  that,  having  now  advanced  so 
far  on  the  road  to  death,  it  would  be  a  pity  to  have  the  trouble  over  again. 
He,  therefore,  still  refused  all  nourishment,  and  died,  as  we  have  said,  of 
starvation. 

The  names  of  the  numerous  treatises  of  Cleanthes  preserved  by  Dio 
genes  Laertius  present  the  usual  catalogue  of  moral  and  philosophical  sub 
jects  :  TT€pl  apercavy  irepl  ^5oi/r)s,  Trepi  &ea>*/,  &c.  A  hymn  of  his  to  Jove  is 
still  extant,  and  contains  some  striking  sentiments.  It  was  edited  by 
Sturz,  1785,  re-edited  by  Merzdorf,  Lips.,  1835. 

The  doctrines  of  Cleanthes  were  almost  exactly  those  of  Zeno.  There 
was  a  slight  variation  between  his  opinion  and  the  more  usual  Stoical 
view  respecting  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  Cleanthes  taught  that  all 
souls  are  immortal,  but  that  the  intensity  of  existence  after  death  would 
vary  according  to  the  strength  or  weakness  of  the  particular  soul,  thereby 
leaving  to  the  wicked  some  apprehension  of  future  punishment;  whereas 
Chrysippus  considered  that  only  the  souls  of  the  wise  and  good  were  to 
survive  death.  Again,  with  regard  to  the  ethical  principle  of  the  Stoics, 
"  to  live  in  unison  with  nature,"  it  is  said  that  Zeno  only  enunciated  the 
vague  direction,  6/j.o\oyov/j.€vws  £TJV,  which  Cleanthes  explained  by  the  ad 
dition  of  rrj  Qva-ei.  By  this  he  meant  the  universal  nature  of  things, 
whereas  Chrysippus  understood  by  the  nature  which  we  are  to  follow, 
the  particular  nature  of  man  as  well  as  universal  nature.1 

III.  CHRYSIPPUS  (Xpixwnros)  was  born  at  Soli,  in  Cilicia,  B.C.  280. 
When  young,  he  lost  his  paternal  property  and  went  to  Athens,  where  he 
became  the  disciple  of  the  Stoic  Cleanthes.  Disliking  the  academic  skep 
ticism,  he  became  one  of  the  most  strenuous  supporters  of  the  principle 
that  knowledge  is  attainable,  and  may  be  established  on  certain  founda 
tions.  Hence,  though  not  the  founder  of  the  Stoic  school,  he  was  the  first 
who  based  its  doctrines  on  a  plausible  system  of  reasoning,  so  that  it  was 
said,  .as  we  have  already  stated,  that  if  Chrysippus  had  not  existed,  the 
Porch  could  not  have  been.2  He  died  in  B.C.  207,  aged  seventy-three. 
Chrysippus  possessed  great  acuteness  and  sagacity,  and  his  industry  was 
so  great  that  he  is  said  to  have  seldom  written  less  than  five  hundred 
lines  a  day,  and  to  have  left  behind  him  seven  hundred  and  five  works. 
Though  none  of  them  are  extant,  yet  numerous  fragments  remain,  which 
have  been  collected  by  Baguet,  "  De  Chrysippi  Vita  et  Reliquiis,"  Lou- 
vaine,  1822,  4to.  His  erudition  was  profound,  and  he  appears  to  have 
overlooked  no  branch  of  study  except  mathematics  and  natural  philos- 
ophy,  which  were  neglected  by  the  Stoics  till  the  time  of  Posidonius. 
1  Diog.  Laert.,  vii.,  89.  -  Id.,  vii.,  183. 


346  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


XI.     THE     SKEPTICAL     OR     PYRRHONIC     SCHOOL. 

I.  The  leading  characteristic  of  this  school  was  to  call  in  question  the 
truth  of  every  system  of  opinions  adopted  by  other  sects,  and  to  hold  no 
other  settled  opinion  save  that  every  thing  is  uncertain. 

II.  On  account  of  the  similarity  of  the  opinions  of  this  sect  and  those  of 
the  Middle  Academy,  many  of  the  real  followers  of  the  former  chose  to 
screen  themselves  from  odium  by  adopting  the  name  of  Academics.    The 
founder  of  the  skeptical  school  was  Pyrrho,  whence  it  has  also  been  called 
the  Pyrrhonic. 

III.  PYRRHO  (Uvppwv)  was  a  native  of  Elis,  in  the  Peloponnesus.     He 
is  said  to  have  been  poor,  and  to  have  followed  at  first  the  profession  of 
a  painter.1     He  is  then  said  to  have  been  attracted  to  philosophy  by  the 
writings  of  Democritus,2  to  have  attended  the  lectures  of  Bryson,  a  dis 
ciple  of  Stilpon,  to  have  attached  himself  closely  to  Anaxarchus,  and  with 
him  to  have  joined  the  expedition  of  Alexander  the  Great.     During  the 
greater  part  of  his  life  he  dwelt  in  retirement,  and  endeavored  to  render 
himself  independent  of  all  external  circumstances.     His  disciple  Timon 
extolled  his  divine  repose  of  soul,  and  his  indifference  to  pleasure  or  pain.3 
It  is  said,  moreover,  that  his  fellow-citizens,  through  their  admiration 
of  him,  made  him  their  high-priest,  and  erected  a  monument  to  him  after 
his  death.4    The  Athenians  also,  as  we  are  told,  conferred  upon  him  the 
rights  of  citizenship.     These  accounts,  however,  are  to  be  received  with 
great  caution,  since  it  is  highly  improbable  that  a  half-insane  man,  such  as 
his  biographer  Antigomis  of  Carystus  depicts  him,  would  ever  have  been 
invested  with  the  high-priesthood,  or  made  an  Athenian  citizen.     We 
know  little  respecting  the  principles  of  his  skeptical  philosophy.     He  as 
serted  that  certain  knowledge  on  any  subject  was  unattainable,  and  that 
the  great  object  of  man  ought  to  be  to  lead  a  virtuous  life.     It  is  related6 
of  this  philosopher  that  he  acted  upon  his  own  principles,  and  carried  his 
skepticism  to  such  a  ridiculous  extreme,  that  his  friends  were  obliged  to 
accompany  him  wherever  he  went,  that  he  might  not  be  run  over  by  ve 
hicles,  or  fall  down  precipices.     Pyrrho  wrote  nothing  except  a  poem  ad 
dressed  to  Alexander,  which  was  rewarded  by  the  latter  in  so  royal  a 
manner,  that  the  statements  respecting  the  poverty  of  the  philosopher's 
mode  of  life  are  not  easily  reconcilable  with  it.     His  philosophical  system 
was  first  reduced  to  writing  by  his  disciple  Timon.     He  reached  the  age 
of  ninety  years,  but  we  have  no  mention  of  the  year  either  of  his  birth  or 
his  death. 

IV.  TIMON  (Tfyxwj/)6  was  a  native  of  Phlius,  and  flourished  in  the  reign 
of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  about  B.C.  279, 7  and  onward.     Strictly  speak 
ing,  therefore,  he  belongs  to  the  succeeding  or  Alexandrine  period  of  lit 
erature  ;  but,  from  his  peculiar  connection  with  the  establishment  of  the 
Pyrrhonic  school,  we  prefer  considering  him  here.     He  first  studied  phi 
losophy  at  Megara,  under  Stilpon,  and  then  returned  home  and  married. 

i  Diog.  Laert.,  ix.,  61,  seqq.  *  Id.,  ix.,  69.  3  Id.,  ix.,  65,  seqq. 

*  Pausan.,  vi.,  24,  5.  5  Diog.  Laert.,  ix.,  62.  «  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

i  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  vol.  iii.,  s.  a.,  279,  272. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  o47 

He  next  went  to  Elis  with  his  wife,  and  heard  Pyrrhon,  whose  tenets  he 
adopted.  Driven  from  Elis  by  straitened  circumstances,  he  spent  some 
time  on  the  Hellespont  and  Propontis,  and  taught  at  Chalcedon,  as  a 
Sophist,  with  such  success  that  he  realized  a  fortune.  He  then  removed 
to  Athens,  where  he  passed  the  remainder  of  his  life,  with  the  exception 
of  a  short  residence  at  Thebes.  He  died  at  the  age  of  almost  ninety.1 

Timon  appears  to  have  been  endowed  by  nature  with  a  powerful  and 
active  mind,  and  with  that  quick  perception  of  the  follies  of  men  which 
betrays  its  possessor  into  a  spirit  of  universal  distrust  both  of  men  and 
truths,  so  as  to  make  him  a  skeptic  in  philosophy  and  a  satirist  in  every 
thing.  He  wrote  numerous  works  both  in  prose  and  poetry.  The  most 
celebrated  of  his  poems  were  the  satiric  compositions  called  Silli  (o-fAAoi ), 
a  word  of  somewhat  doubtful  etymology,  but  which  undoubtedly  describes 
metrical  compositions  of  a  character  at  once  ludicrous  and  sarcastic.  The 
invention  of  this  species  of  poetry  is  ascribed  to  Xenophanes  of  Colophon. 
The  Silli  of  Timon  were  in  three  books,  in  the  first  of  which  he  spoke  in 
his  own  person,  and  the  other  two  were  in  the  form  of  a  dialogue  between 
the  author  and  Xenophanes  of  Colophon,  in  which  Timon  proposed  ques 
tions,  to  which  Xenophanes  replied  at  length.  The  subject  was  a  sar 
castic  account  of  the  tenets  of  all  philosophers,  living  and  dead — an  un 
bounded  field  for  skepticism  and  satire.  They  were  in  hexameter  verse, 
and,  from  the  way  in  which  they  are  mentioned  by  the  ancient  writers, 
as  well  as  from  the  few  fragments  of  them  which  have  come  down  to  us, 
it  is  evident  that  they  were  very  admirable  productions  of  their  kind. 
The  fragments  are  collected  by  Wolke,  De  Gracorum  Sillis,  Warsaw, 
1820  ;  and  by  Paul,  Dissertatio  de  Sittis,  Berlin,  1821. 

XII.     THE     EPICUREAN     SCHOOL. 

I.  The  Epicurean  school,  so  called  from  its  founder  Epicurus,  was  prop 
erly  a  branch  of  the  Eleatic.     In  strictness,  it  belongs,  like  the  preceding, 
to  the  Fifth  or  Alexandrine  period  ;  but  it  may  be  more  conveniently  con 
sidered  in  the  present  place. 

II.  EPICURUS  ('EmKovpos}-  was  the  son  of  Neocles  and  Charestrata,  and 
was  born  B.C.  342,  in  the  island  of  Samos,  where  his  father  had  settled 
as  one  of  the  Athenian  cleruchi ;  but  he  belonged  to  the  Attic  demus  of 
Gargettus,  and  hence  is  sometimes  called  the  Gargettian.3     At  the  age 
of  eighteen  he  came  to  Athens,  having  spent  the  previous  part  of  his  life 
in  Samos  and  Teos.     We  are  told  that  he  had  begun  to  study  philosophy 
when  only  fourteen,  having  been  incited  thereto  by  a  desire,  which  the 
teachers  to  whom  he  had  applied  had  failed  to  satisfy,  of  understanding 
Hesiod's  description  of  Chaos ;  and  that  he  began  with  the  writings  of 
Democritus.     In  Samos,  also,  he  is  said  to  have  received  lessons  from 
Pamphilus,  a  follower  of  Plato.     At  the  time  when  Epicurus  arrived  in 
Athens,  Xenocrates  was  teaching  in  the  Academy,  and  Theophrastus  in 
the  Lyceum ;  and  we  may  suppose  that  he  did  not  fail  to  avail  himself 
of  the  opportunities  of  instruction  which  were  thus  within  his  reach. 

1  Diog.  Laert.,  ix.,  12,  seqq.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  t>, 

3  Cic.,  "Ep.  ad  Fam.,  xv.,  16. 


348  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Indeed,  it  is  actually  stated  by  Demetrius  Magnes  that  Epicurus  was  a 
pupil  of  Xenocrates.  After  a  short  stay  at  Athens,  owing  to  the  outbreak 
of  the  Lamian  war,  he  went  to  Colophon,  and  subsequently  resided  at 
Mytilene  and  Lampsacus,  in  which  places  he  was  engaged  for  five  years 
in  teaching  philosophy,  namely,  one  year  in  Mytilene  and  four  years  in 
Lampsacus.  In  B.C.  306,  when  he  had  attained  the  age  of  thirty-five, 
he  again  came  to  Athens,  where  he  purchased  for  eighty  minse  a  garden 
— the  famous  KTJTRH  'Eirucovpov — in  which  he  established  his  philosophical 
school.  Here  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life,  surrounded  by  numer 
ous  friends  and  pupils,  and  by  his  three  brothers,  Neocles,  Charidemus, 
and  Aristobulus,  who  likewise  devoted  themselves  to  the  study  of  philos 
ophy.  His  mode  of  living  was  simple,  temperate,  and  cheerful ;  and  the 
aspersions  of  comic  poets  and  of  later  philosophers,  who  were  opposed  to 
his  doctrines,  and  who  describe  him  as  a  person  devoted  to  sensual  pleas 
ures,  do  not  seem  entitled  to  the  least  credit.  He  took  no  part  in  public 
affairs.  He  died  in  B.C.  270,  at  the  age  of  seventy-two,  after  a  long  and 
painful  illness,  which  he  endured  with  truly  philosophic  patience  and 
courage.1 

Epicurus  appears  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  prolific  of  all  the  an 
cient  Greek  writers.  Diogenes  Laertius,  who  calls  him  iroXvypa^unaTos^ 
states  that  he  wrote  about  300  volumes  (itfaivSpoi).  His  works,  however, 
are  said  to  have  been  full  of  repetitions  and  quotations  of  authorities.  A 
list  of  the  best  of  his  works  is  given  by  Diogenes,  among  which  we  may 
particularly  mention  the  one  On  Nature  (Uepl  &v<re<as),  in  thirty-seven 
books.  Of  his  epistles,  four  are  preserved  in  Diogenes.  The  first  is  very 
brief,  and  was  addressed  by  Epicurus,  just  before  his  death,  to  Idomen- 
eus.  The  three  others  are  of  far  greater  importance  :  the  first  of  them  is 
addressed  to  one  Herodotus,  and  contains  an  outline  of  what  were  termed 
Canonics,  and  of  the  Physics  also  ;  the  second,  addressed  to  Pythocles, 
contains  his  theory  about  meteors ;  and  the  third,  which  is  addressed  to 
Menceceus,  gives  a  concise  view  of  his  Ethics ;  so  that  these  three  epis 
tles,  the  genuineness  of  which  can  scarcely  be  doubted,  furnish  us  with 
an  outline  of  his  whole  philosophical  system.  They  were  edited  separ 
ately  by  Ntirnberger,  in  his  edition  of  the  tenth  book  of  Diogenes  Laertius, 
Niirnberg,  1791,  8vo.  The  letters  to  Herodotus  and  Pythocles  were  edit 
ed  by  Schneider,  Leipzig,  1813,  8vo.  These  letters,  together  with  the 
Kvpiai  86£ai,  that  is,  forty-four  propositions  containing  the  substance  of 
the  ethical  philosophy  of  Epicurus,  which  are  likewise  preserved  in  Di 
ogenes,  must  be  our  principal  guides  in  examining  and  judging  of  the 
Epicurean  philosophy.  All  the  other  works  of  Epicurus  have  perished, 
with  the  exception  of  a  considerable  number  of  fragments.  Some  parts 
of  the  work  Uepl  Qixreoos,  especially  of  the  second  and  eleventh  books, 
which  treat  of  the  eft>o>Aa,  have  been  found  among  the  rolls  at  Hercula- 
neum,  and  are  published  in  Corsini's  Volumin.  Herculan.,  vol.  ii.,  Naples, 
1809,  from  which  they  were  reprinted  separately  by  Orelli,  Leipzig,  1818, 
8vo.  Some  fragments  of  the  tenth  book  of  the  same  work  have  been  ed 
ited  by  Kreyssig,  in  his  Comment,  de  Sallust.  histor.  Fragm.,  p.  237,  scqq. 
1  Diog.  Laert.,  x.,  13,  seqq.  *  Id.,  x.,  26.  ' 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  349 

If  we  may  judge  of  the  style  of  Epicurus  from  these  few  remains,  it  must 
be  acknowledged  that  it  is  clear  and  animated,  though  it  is  not  distin 
guished  for  any  other  peculiar  merits. 

Epicurus  divided  the  whole  field  of  knowledge  into  three  parts,  to 
which  he  gave  the  names  respectively  of  Canonics,  Physics,  and  Ethics.1 
The  first  two  were  subordinate  to  the  third.  The  end  of  all  knowledge, 
of  ethics  directly  or  immediately,  of  canonics  and  physics  indirectly  or 
mediately  through  ethics,  was,  according  to  Epicurus,  to  increase  the 
happiness  of  man.  Canonics,  which  formed  a  subject  altogether  intro 
ductory  both  to  physics  and  ethics,  treated  of  the  means  by  which  knowl 
edge,  both  physical  and  ethical,  was  obtained,  and  of  the  conditions  or 
(as  they  were  called  by  Epicurus)  criteria  of  truth.  These  conditions  or 
criteria  were,  according  to  him,  sensations  (otV07j(reis),  ideas,  or  imagina 
tions  (Tr/joA^^ety),  and  affections  (Traflrj).  From  these  three  sorts  of  con 
sciousness  we  get  all  our  knowledge.  What  Epicurus  then  called  canon 
ics,  viewed  in  relation  to  physics  and  ethics,  is,  when  viewed  absolutely 
or  in  itself,  psychology.  Epicurus  seems  to  have  explained  rightly  the 
dependence  of  ideas  upon  sensations  ;2  but,  in  accounting  for  sensations, 
he,  like  Democritus,  left  the  path  of  sound  psychology,  and  introduced 
the  fanciful  hypothesis  of  emanations  from  bodies. 

In  the  physical  part  of  his  philosophy  he  followed  the  atomistic  doc 
trines  of  Democritus,  though  priding  himself  on  being  independent  of  all 
his  predecessors.  His  views  are  well  known  from  Lucretius's  poem,  De 
Rerum  Natura.  According  to  Epicurus,  as  also  to  Democritus  and  Leu- 
cippus  before  him,  the  universe  consists  of  two  parts,  matter  and  space, 
or  vacuum,  in  which  matter  exists  and  moves  ;  and  all  matter,  of  every 
kind  and  form,  is  reducible  to  certain  indivisible  particles,  called,  from 
this  circumstance,  atoms,  which  are  eternal  in  their  nature.  These 
atoms  moving,  according  to  a  natural  tendency,  straight  downward,  and 
also  obliquely,  have  thereby  come  to  form  the  different  bodies  which  are 
found  in  the  world,  and  which  differ  in  kind  and  shape  according  as  the 
atoms  are  differently  placed  in  respect  of  one  another.  We  obtain  our 
knowledge  and  form  our  conceptions  of  things,  according  to  Epicurus, 
through  eflJwAa,  that  is,  images  of  things  which  are  reflected  from  them, 
and  pass  through  our  senses  into  our  minds.  Such  a  theory,  however,  is 
clearly  destructive  of  all  absolute  truth,  and  a  mere  momentary  impres 
sion  upon  our  senses  or  feelings  is  substituted  for  it.  But  the  deficiencies 
of  his  system  are  most  striking  in  his  views  concerning  the  gods,  which 
drew  upon  him  the  charge  of  atheism.  His  gods,  like  every  thing  else 
consisted  of  atoms,  and  our  notions  of  them  are  based  upon  the  cf8u\a, 
which  are  reflected  from  them  and  pass  into  our  minds.  They  were  and 
always  had  been  in  the  enjoyment  of  perfect  happiness,  which  had  not 
been  disturbed  by  the  laborious  business  of  creating  the  world ;  and,  as 
the  government  of  the  world  would  interfere  with  their  happiness,  he  con 
ceived  them  as  exercising  no  influence  whatever  upon  the  world  or  man.3 

His  ethical  theory  was  based  upon  the  dogma  of  the  Cyrenaics,  that 
pleasure  constitutes  the  highest  happiness,  and  must  consequently  be  the 

1  Penny  Cyclop.,  ix.,  p.  472  2  Diog.  LaerL,  x.,  33.  'J  Smith,  I.  c. 


350  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

end  of  all  human  exertions.  Epicurus,  however,  developed  and  ennobled 
this  theory  in  a  manner  which  constitutes  the  real  merit  of  his  philosophy, 
and  which  gained  for  him  so  many  friends  and  admirers  both  in  antiquity 
and  in  modern  times.  Pleasure  with  him  was  not  a  mere  momentary 
and  transitory  sensation,  but  he  conceived  it  as  something  lasting  and 
imperishable,  consisting  in  pure  and  noble  mental  enjoyments,  that  is,  in 
arapa^ia  and  airov'ia,  or  freedom  from  pain  and  from  all  influences  which 
disturb  the  peace  of  our  mind,  and  thereby  our  happiness,  which  is  the 
result  of  it.  The  summum  bonum,  according  to  him,  consisted  in  this 
peace  of  mind ;  and  this  was  based  upon  QpAvrjo-is,  which  he  described  as 
the  beginning  of  every  thing  good,  as  the  origin  of  all  virtues,  and  which 
he  himself,  therefore,  occasionally  treated  as  the  highest  good  itself.1 

The  number  of  pupils  of  Epicurus  was  very  great ;  but  his  philosophy 
received  no  farther  development  at  their  hands,  except,  perhaps,  that  in 
subsequent  times  his  lofty  notion  of  pleasure  and  happiness  was  re 
duced  to  that  of  material  and  sensual  pleasure.  His  immediate  disciples 
adopted  and  followed  his  doctrines  with  the  most  scrupulous  conscien 
tiousness.  They  were  attached  and  devoted  to  their  master  in  a  manner 
which  has  rarely  been  equalled  either  in  ancient  or  modern  times.  Their 
esteem,  love,  and  veneration  for  him  almost  bordered  upon  worship. 
They  are  said  to  have  committed  his  works  to  memory.  They  had  his 
portrait  engraved  upon  rings  and  drinking  vessels,  and  celebrated  his 
birth-day  every  year.  Athens  honored  him  with  bronze  statues.  But, 
notwithstanding  the  extraordinary  devotion  of  his  pupils  and  friends, 
whose  number,  says  Diogenes,  exceeded  that  of  the  population  of  whole 
towns,  there  is  no  philosopher  in  antiquity  who  has  been  so  violently  at 
tacked,  and  whose  ethical  doctrines  have  been  so  much  misunderstood  as 
Epicurus.  The  cause  of  this  was  partly  a  superficial  knowledge  of  his 
philosophy,  of  which  Cicero,  for  example,  is  guilty  to  a  very  great  extent ; 
and  partly,  also,  the  conduct  of  men  who  called  themselves  Epicureans, 
and  who,  taking  advantage  of  the  facility  with  which  his  ethical  theory 
was  made  the  handmaid  of -a  sensual  and  debauched  life,  gave  themselves 
up  to  the  enjoyment  of  sensual  pleasures.  At  Rome,  and  during  the  time 
of  Roman  ascendency  in  the  ancient  world,  the  philosophy  of  Epicurus 
never  took  any  firm  root ;  and  it  is  then  and  there  that,  owing  to  the 
paramount  influence  of  the  Stoic  philosophy,  we  meet  with  the  bitterest 
antagonists  of  Epicurus.2 

III.  METRODORUS  (Mr)Tp68copos)  was  the  most  distinguished  of  the  disci 
ples  of  Epicurus.  He  was  a  native,  according  to  some  accounts,3  of 
Lampsacus,  according  to  others,  of  Athens,  and  lived  with  Epicurus  on 
terms  of  the  closest  friendship,  never  having  left  him  from  the  time  that 
he  became  acquainted  with  him,  except  for  six  months  on  one  occasion, 
when  he  paid  a  visit  to  his  home.  He  died  in  B.C.  277,  in  the  fifty-third 
year  of  his  age,  seven  years  before  Epicurus,  who  would  have  appointed 
him  his  successor  had  he  survived  him.  He  left  behind  him  a  son  named 
Epicurus,  and  a  daughter,  for  whom  Epicurus  the  elder  provided  by  will 
out  of  the  property  which  he  left  behind  him.  The  philosophy  of  Metro- 

1  Smith,  1.  c.  2  Id.  ib.  3  Strab.,  xiii.,  p.  589  ;  Cic.,  Tusc.  Disp.,  v.,  37. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  351 

dorus  appears  to  have  been  of  a  more  grossly  sensual  kind  than  that  of 
Epicurus.  Perfect  happiness  he  made,  according  to  Cicero's  account,  to 
consist  in  having  a  well-constituted  body,  and  knowing  that  it  would  al 
ways  remain  so.  Diogenes  Laertius  enumerates  several  of  his  works, 
and  Athenaeus  makes  mention  of  his  letters.  No  remains  of  his  writings 
have  come  down  to  us.1 


CHAPTER  XXXVI. 
FOURTH  OR  ATTIC  PERIOD— continued. 

MATHEMATICS. ASTRONOMY. MEDICINE. 

I.     MATHEMATICS. ASTRONOMY. 

I.  WE  have  already  made  incidental  mention  of  the  progress  of  mathe 
matical  and  astronomical  knowledge  among  the  Greeks  in  our  accounts 
of  some  of  the  schools  of  ancient  philosophy.     Mathematics,  however, 
were  not  cultivated  as  a  distinct  and  regular  science  until  the  establish 
ment  of  the  Alexandrean  school.    Previously  to  this  period  a  few  individ 
uals  merely  had  distinguished  themselves  by  the  pursuit  of  mathematical 
and  astronomical  knowledge,  of  whom  we  will  now  give  a  brief  notice. 

II.  The  names,  when  arranged  in  chronological  order,  are,  Hippocrates, 
of  Chios  ;   Theodorus,  of  Gyrene  ;  Meton,  of  Athens  ;  Archytas,  of  Taren- 
tum  ;  and  Eudoxus,  of  Cnidus. 

1.  HIPPOCRATES  ('iTnro/cpaTTjs),  the  namesake  of  the  celebrated  physician, 
was  a  native  of  Chios,  and  a  Pythagorean  philosopher,  and  lived  about 
B.C.  460.     He  is  mentioned  chiefly  as  a  mathematician,  and  is  said  to 
have  been  the  first  who  reduced  geometry  to  a  regular  system.     He 
seems  to  have  been  also  engaged  in  researches  respecting  the  square  of 
the  circle  ;  but  we  have  no  means  of  judging  accurately  of  his  mathemat 
ical  merits.     Aristotle  states  that  in  every  other  respect  he  was  a  man 
not  above  mediocrity. 

2.  THEODORUS  (®e(f5copos),  of  Cyrene,  was  a  Pythagorean  philosopher, 
of  the  age  of  Pericles.     According  to  Proclus,  he  was  a  little  younger 
than  Anaxagoras,2  and  was  eminent  as  a  mathematician.    Appuleius3  and 
Diogenes  Laertius*  both  state  that  Plato  went  to  Cyrene  to  study  geom 
etry  under  a  Theodorus  of  that  place,  the  same  probably  with  the  one 
whom  we  are  here  considering. 

3.  METON  (MeVcw)  was  an  astronomer  of  Athens,  who,  in  conjunction 
with  Euctemon,  introduced  the  cycle  of  nineteen  years,  by  which  he  ad 
justed  the  course  of  the  sun  and  moon,  since  he  had  observed  that  235 
lunar  months  correspond  very  nearly  to  nineteen  solar  years.5    The  com 
mencement  of  this  cycle  has  been  placed  B.C.  432.     We  have  no  details 
of  Meton's  life,  with  the  exception  that  he  feigned  insanity  to  avoid  sail 
ing  for  Sicily  in  the  ill-fated  expedition  of  which  he  is  stated  to  have  had 
an  evil  presentiment.6 

1  Smith,  1.  c.         2  Prod,  in  Euclid.  Elem.,  1.  3  De  Dogm.  Flat.,  lib.  i.,  prope  init. 

*  Diog.  Lacrt.,  iii., 6.      5  JElian, V.  H., x.,7  ;  Diod.  Sic., xii., 36.      «  JElian,V.  H.,  xiii.,  12. 


352  GREEK    LITERATURE. 


4.  ARCHYTAS  ('Apx^as),1  of  Tarentum,  a  distinguished  Pythagorean 
philosopher,  mathematician,  general,  and  statesman,  probably  lived  about 
B.C.  400  and  onward,  so  that  he  was  contemporary  with  Plato,  whose 
life,  as  we  have  before  stated,  he  is  said  to  have  saved  by  his  influence 
with  the  tyrant  Dionysius.2    Like  the  Pythagoreans  in  general,  he  paid 
much  attention  to  mathematics.     Horace3  calls  him  "  maris  et  terra  nu- 
meroque  carentis  arena  Mensorem."     He  solved  the  problem  of  the  doub 
ling  of  the  cube,4  and  invented  the  method  of  analytical  geometry.     He 
was  the  first,  also,  who  applied  the  principles  of  mathematics  to  me 
chanics.     To  his  theoretical  science  he  added  the  skill  of  a  practical 
mechanician,  and  constructed  various  machines  and  automatons,  among 
which  his  wooden  flying  dove,  in  particular,  was  the  wonder  of  antiquity.6 
He  also  applied  mathematics  with  success  to  musical  science,  and  even 
to  metaphysical  philosophy.     The  fragments  and  titles  of  works  ascribed 
to  Archytas  are  very  numerous,  but  the  genuineness  of  many  of  them  is 
greatly  doubted.     Most  of  them  are  found  in  Stobaeus.     They  have  been 
published  in  part  by  Gale,  Opusc.  Mythol.,  Cambridge,  1671  ;  Amst.,  1688  ; 
and  more  fully  by  Orelli,  Opusc.  Sentent.  et  Moral.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  234,  seqq. 

5.  EUDOXUS  (Ev5o£os),6  of  Cnidus,  was,  according  to  Diogenes  Laertius, 
an  astronomer,  geometer,  physician,  and  legislator.     It  is  only  in  the  first 
capacity,  however,  that  his  fame  has  descended  to  our  day,  and  he  has 
more  of  it  than  can  be  justified  by  any  account  of  his  astronomical  sci 
ence  now  in  existence.     As  the  probable  introducer  of  the  sphere  into 
Greece,  and  perhaps  the  corrector,  upon  Egyptian  information,  of  the 
length  of  the  year,  he  enjoyed  a  wide  reputation.     According  to  Dioge 
nes  Laertius,7  Eudoxus  went  to  Athens  at  the  age  of  twenty-three  (he 
had  been  the  pupil  of  Archytas  in  geometry),  and  heard  Plato  for  some 
months,  struggling  at  the  same  time  with  poverty.     Being  dismissed  by 
Plato,  but  for  what  reason  is  not  stated,  his  friends  raised  some  money, 
and  he  sailed  for  Egypt,  with  letters  of  recommendation  to  Nectanabis, 
who,  in  his  turn,  recommended  him  to  the  priests.     With  them  he  re 
mained  sixteen  months,  with  his  chin  and  eyebrows  shaved.     After  a 
time  he  came  back  to  Athens,  with  a  band  of  pupils,  having  in  the  mean 
time  taught  philosophy  in  Cyzicus,  on  the  Propontis.     The  fragmentary 
notices  of  Eudoxus  are  numerous.     Strabo  mentions  him  frequently,  and 
states  that  the  observatory  of  Eudoxus  at  Cnidus  was  existing  in  his 
time,  from  which  he  was  accustomed  to  observe  the  star  Canopus  ;8  so 
that  Eudoxus,  before  returning  to  Athens,  must  have  spent  some  time 
also  in  his  native  place.     Strabo,  moreover,  informs  us  that  he  remained 
in  Egypt  thirteen  years  (differing  in  this  from  Diogenes),  and  attributes 
to  him  the  introduction  of  the  odd  quarter  of  a  day  into  the  value  of  the 
year.     Seneca  states  that  he  first  brought  the  motions  of  the  planets  (a 
theory  on  this  subject)  from  Egypt  into  Greece.     Aristotle9  says  that  he 
made  separate  spheres  for  the  stars,  sun,  moon,  and  planets.     According 
to  Archimedes,  he  made  the  diameter  of  the  sun  nine  times  as  great  as 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Diog.  Laert.,  viii.,  79,  seqq.  3  Od.,  i.,  28,  1. 

*  Vitruv.,  ix.,pr(Bf.  5  Gell,  x.,  12.  6  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

7  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  86,  seqq.  8  Strab.,  xvii.,  p.  806.  9  Metaph.,  xii.,  8. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  353 

that  of  the  rnoon.    Vitruvius  attributes  to  him  the  invention  of  a  solar 
dial. 

But  all  we  positively  know  of  Eudoxus  is  from  the  poem  of  Aratus, 
and  the  commentary  of  Hipparchus  upon  it.  From  this  commentary  we 
learn  that  Aratus  was  not  himself  an  observer,  but  was  merely  the  versi 
fier  of  the  $aiv6i*.eva  of  Eudoxus,  of  which  Hipparchus  has  preserved  frag 
ments  for  comparison  with  the  version  of  Aratus.  The  result  is,  that 
though  there  were  by  no  means  so  many  or  so  great  errors  in  Eudoxus 
as  in  Aratus,  yet  the  opinion  which  must  be  formed  of  the  work  of  the 
former  is,  that  it  was  written  in  the  rudest  state  of  the  science  by  an  ob 
server  who  was  not  very  competent  even  to  the  task  of  looking  at  the 
risings  and  settings  of  the  stars.  Delambre1  has  given  a  full  account  of 
the  comparison  made  by  Hipparchus  of  Aratus  with  Eudoxus,  and  of  both 
with  his  own  observations.  He  can  not  bring  himself  to  think  that  Eu 
doxus  knew  any  thing  of  geometry  (though  it  is  on  record  that  he  wrote 
geometrical  works),  in  spite  of  the  praises  of  Proclus,  Cicero,  Ptolemy, 
Sextus  Empiricus  (who  places  him  with  Hipparchus),  and  others.  Eu 
doxus,  as  cited  by  Hipparchus,  neither  talks  like  a  geometer,  nor  like  a 
person  who  had  seen  the  heavens  he  describes  :  a  bad  globe,  constructed 
some  centuries  before  his  time  in  Egypt,  might,  for  any  thing  that  appears, 
have  been  his  sole  authority.  But  supposing,  which  is  likely  enough,  that 
he  was  the  first  who  brought  any  globe  at  all  into  Greece,  it  is  not  much 
to  be  wondered  at  that  his  reputation  should  have  been  magnified.  Eu 
doxus  is  said  to  have  written  several  works,  but  none  of  them  have  come 
down  to  us. 

II.     MEDICINE.8 

I.  The  earliest  records  of  the  practice  of  medicine  are  extremely  ob 
scure.     Among  the  Jews,  it  appears  to  have  been  entirely  confined  to  the 
priests,  and  the  whole  art  seems  to  have  consisted  in  the  prevention  of 
contagion  by  isolation  and  cleanliness,  and  the  administration  of  a  few 
uncertain  remedies.     The  Egyptians,  according  to  the  account  of  Herod- 
odotus,  must  have  made  some  little  progress  ;  cathartics  and  emetics 
were  well  known  to  them,  and  much  used  ;  and  such  was  the  subdivision 
of  labor,  that  there  were  physicians  for  every  separate  complaint :  some 
for  the  eyes,  others  for  the  head,  others  for  the  teeth,  others  for  the  ab 
dominal  parts,  and  others  for  diseases  which  did  not  manifest  themselves 
by  any  outward,  visible  symptoms.3     It  appears,  however,  that  in  the 
time  of  Darius  Hystaspis  the  Greeks  possessed  more  skill  than  the  Egyp 
tians.4    The  Greeks  probably  derived  their  knowledge  of  medicine,  with 
that  of  many  other  arts,  from  Egypt,  whence,  according  to  one  account, 
the  centaur  Chiron,  who  plays  so  conspicuous  a  part  in  some  of  their  le 
gends,  is  said  to  have  introduced  it  among  them. 

II.  AESCULAPIUS  ('AovcA^Tnck),  the  pupil  of  Chiron,5  so  much  improved 
the  healing  art  that  he  was  deified ;  and  his  sons,  MACHAON  and  PODA- 

1  Hist.  Astr.  Anc.,  vol.  i.,  p.  107.  2  Penny  Cyclop.,  xv.,  p.  57. 

3  Herod.,  ii.,  84.  *  Id.,  iiu,  129. 

s  Pausan.,  ii.,  26,  5  ;  Apollod.,  iii.,  10,  3. 


354  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

LiRius,1  accompanied  the  Grecian  army  to  the  siege  of  Troy.  From  cir 
cumstances  mentioned  in  the  Iliad,  it  would  appear  that  their  practice 
was  almost  entirely  confined  to  the  treatment  of  wounds,  and  that  charms 
and  incantations  formed  a  considerable  portion  of  the  means  which  they 
employed.  The  descendants  of  ^Esculapius,  as  they  called  themselves, 
but,  in  reality,  an  order  or  caste  of  priesta,  under  the  name  of  Asclepiada 
('A(r«:A7j7no5at),  were  for  many  years  the  chief  practitioners  of  medicine, 
and  the  knowledge  of  the  healing  art  was  thus,  for  a  long  period,  inti 
mately  connected  with  religion.  This  knowledge,  in  fact,  was  regarded 
as  a  sacred  .secret,  which  was  transmitted  from  father  to  son  in  the  fam 
ilies  of  the  Asdepiada. 

III.  In  the  sixth  century  before  the  Christian  era,  medicine,  with  other 
sciences,  began  to  be  more  philosophically  studied  in  Greece,  and  among 
the  first  of  those  who  devoted  much  of  their  time  to  the  investigation  of 
the  structure  and  functions  of  the  animal  body  may  be  ranked  Pythago 
ras.     Democritus  and  Heraclitus  appear  also  to  have  added  considerably 
both  to  anatomy  and  to  practical  medicine,  and  their  contemporary  He- 
rodicus  first  introduced  the  practice  of  gymnastic  exercises,  which  after 
ward  formed  so  large  a  part  of  medical  treatment.     But  the  most  remark 
able  man  in  the  history  of  Grecian  medicine  was  Hippocrates.2 

IV.  HIPPOCRATES  (<linroKpdT'ns)s  was  born  in  the  island  of  Cos,  about 
B.C.  460.     He  belonged  to  the  caste  or  order  of  the  Asclepiadae,  and  was 
the  son  of  Heraclides,  who  was  also  a  physician.     He  was  instructed  in 
medical  science  by  his  father  and  by  Herodicus,  and  he  is  said  to  have 
been  also  a  pupil  in  rhetoric  of  Gorgias  of  Leontini.     He  wrote,  taught, 
and  practiced  his  profession  at  home  ;  travelled  in  different  parts  of  the 
continent  of  Greece  ;  and  died  at  Larissa,  in  Thessaly,  about  B.C.  357,  at 
the  age  of  103.     He  had  two  sons,  Thessalus  and  Dracon,  and  a  son-in- 
law,  Polybus,  all  of  whom  followed  the  same  profession,  and  who  are 
supposed  to  have  been  the  authors  of  some  of  the  works  in  the  Hippo- 
cratic  collection.     These  are  the  only  certain  facts  which  we  know  re 
specting  the  life  of  Hippocrates  ;  but  tt>  these  later  writers  have  added  a 
large  collection  of  stories,  many  of  which  are  clearly  fabulous.     Thus 
he  is  said  to  have  stopped  the  plague  at  Athens  by  burning  fires  through 
out  the  city,  by  suspending  chaplets  of  flowers,  and  by  the  use  of  an  an 
tidote,  the  composition  of  which  is  preserved  by  Joannes  Actuarius.     It 
is  also  related  that  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  king  of  Persia,  invited  Hip 
pocrates  to  come  to  his  assistance  during  a  time  of  pestilence,  but  that 
Hippocrates  refused  his  request  on  the  ground  of  his  being  the  enemy  of 
his  country. 

The  writings  which  have  come  down  to  us  under  the  name  of  Hip 
pocrates  were  composed  by  several  different  persons,  and  are  of  very 
different  merit.  They  are  more  than  sixty  in  number,  but  of  these  only 
a  few  are  certainly  genuine.  These  few  are  as  follows :  1. 
Pranotioncs  or  Prognosticon.  2.  'A^opjcr/ioi,  Aphorismi.  3. 
De  Morbis  Popularibus  (or  Epidemiorurri).  4.  Ucpl  Aiair-ns  'O|eW,  DC  Rati- 

1  I/.,  ii.,  731 ;  iv.,  194;  xi.,  518.  2  Penny  Cyclop.,  I  c. 

3  Greenhill,  in  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  355 


one  victus  in  Morbis  Acutis,  or  De  Diata  Acutorum.  5.  Ilcpt  'Ae'pcoj/, 
TOTTUV,  De  Aere,  Aquis,  et  Locis.  6.  Ilepl  TO>J/  eV  /ce^aA.?/  rpc»p.drci)j/,  De  Cap- 
itis  Vulneribus.  Some  of  the  other  works  were  perhaps  written  by  Hip 
pocrates,  but  the  great  majority  were  composed  by  his  disciples  and  fol 
lowers,  many  of  whom  bore  the  name  of  Hippocrates.  The  work  by 
which  Hippocrates  is  most  popularly  known  is  the  one  termed  'A^opiff^oi, 
or  Aphorisms,  and  which  appears  to  have  been  the  production  of  his  old 
age.  It  consists  of  extracts  from  his  other  works,  to  which  were  after 
ward  added  other  sentences  taken  from  later  authors. 

Hippocrates  is  mentioned  or  referred  to  by  no  less  than  ten  persons 
anterior  to  the  foundation  of  the  Alexandrean  school,  and  among  them  by 
Aristotle  and  Plato.  At  the  time  of  the  formation  of  the  great  Alexan 
drean  library,  the  different  treatises  which  bear  the  name  of  Hippocrates 
were  diligently  sought  for  and  formed  into  a  single  collection  ;  and  about 
this  time  commences  the  series  of  commentators,  which  has  continued 
through  a  period  of  more  than  two  thousand  years  to  the  present  day. 
The  first  person  who  is  known  to  have  commented  on  any  of  the  works 
of  the  Hippocratic  collection  is  Herophilus,  who  lived  at  Alexandrea  un 
der  the  first  Ptolemy.  The  most  ancient  commentary  still  in  existence 
is  that  on  the  treatise  "  De  Articidis,"  by  Apollonius  Citiensis.  By  far 
the  most  voluminous,  and,  at  the  same  time,  by  far  the  most  valuable 
commentaries  that  remain,  are  those  of  Galen,  who  wrote  several  works 
in  illustration  of  the  writings  of  Hippocrates,  besides  those  which  we  now 
possess.  The  other  ancient  commentaries  that  remain  are  those  of  Pal- 
ladius,  Joannes  Alexandrinus,  Stephanus  Atheniensis,  Meletius,  Theophi- 
lus  Protospatharius,  and  Damascius  ;  besides  a  spurious  work  attributed 
to  Oribasius,  a  glossary  of  obsolete  and  difficult  words  by  Erotianus,  and 
some  Arabic  commentaries  that  have  never  been  published.  The  writ 
ings  of  Hippocrates  were  held  in  the  highest  esteem  by  the  ancient  Greek 
and  Latin  physicians,  and  most  of  them  also  were  translated  into  Arabic. 
In  the  Middle  Ages,  however,  they  were  not  so  much  studied  as  those  of 
some  other  authors,  whose  works  are  of  a  more  practical  character,  and 
better  fitted  for  being  made  a  class-book  and  manual  of  instruction.  In 
more  modern  times,  on  the  contrary,  the  works  of  the  Hippocratic  collec 
tion  have  been  valued  more  according  to  their  real  worth,  while  many  of 
the  most  popular  writers  of  the  Middle  Ages  have  fallen  into  complete 
neglect.1 

Hippocrates  divides  the  causes  of  disease  into  two  principal  classes  ; 
the  one  comprehending  the  influence  of  seasons,  climates,  water,  situa 
tion,  &c.,  and  the  other  consisting  of  more  personal  and  private  causes, 
such  as  result  from  the  particular  kind  and  amount  of  food  and  exercise 
in  which  each  separate  individual  indulges  himself.  The  modifications 
of  the  atmosphere,  dependent  on  different  seasons  and  climates,  is  a  sub 
ject  which  was  successfully  treated  by  Hippocrates,  and  which  is  still 
far  from  being  exhausted  by  all  the  researches  of  modern  science.  He 
considered  that  while  heat  and  cold,  moisture  and  dryness,  succeeded 
one  another  throughout  the  year,  the  human  body  underwent  certain 
1  Grecnhill,  I.  c. 


356  GREEK    LITERATURE. 

analogous  changes,  which  influenced  the  diseases  of  the  period ;  and  on 
this  basis  was  founded  the  doctrine  of  pathological  constitutions,  corre 
sponding  to  particular  conditions  of  the  atmosphere,  so  that,  whenever 
the  year  or  the  season  exhibited  a  special  character  in  which  such  or  such 
a  temperature  prevailed,  those  persons  who  were  exposed  to  its  influence 
were  affected  by  a  series  of  disorders  all  bearing  the  same  stamp.  How 
plainly  the  same  idea  runs  through  the  Observationes  Medicce  of  Syden- 
ham,  the  "  English  Hippocrates,"  need  not  be  pointed  out  to  those  who 
are  at  all  familiar  with  his  works.  The  belief  in  the  influence  which  dif 
ferent  climates  exercise  on  the  human  frame  follows  naturally  from  the 
theory  just  mentioned ;  for,  in  fact,  a  climate  may  be  considered  as  noth 
ing  more  than  a  permanent  season,  whose  effects  may  be  expected  to  be 
more  powerful,  inasmuch  as  the  cause  is  ever  at  work  upon  mankind. 
Accordingly,  Hippocrates  attributes  to  climate  both  the  conformation  of 
the  body  and  the  disposition  of  the  mind — indeed,  almost  every  thing ; 
and  if  the  Greeks  were  found  to  be  hardy  freemen,  and  the  Asiatics  ef 
feminate  slaves,  he  accounts  for  the  difference  of  their  characters  by  that 
of  the  climates  in  which  they  lived.1 

With  respect  to  the  second  class  of  causes  producing  disease,  he  at 
tributed  all  sorts  of  disorders  to  a  vicious  system  of  diet,  which,  whether 
excessive  or  defective,  he  considered  to  be  equally  injurious  ;  and  in  the 
same  way,  he  supposed  that  when  bodily  exercise  was  either  too  much 
indulged  or  entirely  neglected,  the  health  was  equally  likely  to  suffei- 
though  by  different  forms  of  disease.  Into  all  the  minutiae  of  the  "  Hu 
moral  Pathology"  (as  it  was  called),  which  kept  its  ground  in  Europe  as 
the  prevailing  doctrine  of  all  the  medical  sects  for  more  than  twenty  cen 
turies,  it  would  be  out  of  place  to  enter  here.  It  will  be  sufficient,  how 
ever,  to  remark,  that  the  four  fluids  or  humors  of  the  body  (blood,  phlegm, 
yellow  bile,  and  black  bile)  were  supposed  to  be  the  primary  seat  of  dis 
ease  ;  that  health  was  the  result  of  the  due  combination  (or  crasis)  of 
these,  and  that  when  this  crasis  was  disturbed,  disease  was  the  conse 
quence  ;  that  in  the  course  of  a  disorder  which  was  proceeding  favorably, 
these  humors  underwent  a  certain  change  in  quality  (or  coction),  which 
was  the  sign  of  returning  health,  as  preparing  the  way  for  the  expulsion 
of  the  morbid  matter,  or  crisis ;  and  that  these  crises  had  a  tendency  to 
occur  at  certain  stated  periods,  which  were  hence  called  critical  days.2 

The  medical  practice  of  Hippocrates  was  cautious  and  feeble,  so  much 
so  that  he  was  in  after  times  reproached  with  letting  his  patients  die,  by 
doing  nothing  to  keep  them  alive.  It  consisted  chiefly  in  watching  the 
operations  of  nature,  and  promoting  the  critical  evacuations  mentioned 
above  ;  so  that  attention  to  diet  and  regimen  was  the  principal  and  often 
the  only  remedy  which  he  employed.  Several  hundred  substances  have 
been  enumerated  which  are  used  medicinally  in  different  parts  of  the 
Hippocratic  collection  ;  of  these,  by  far  the  greater  portion  belong  to  the 
vegetable  kingdom,  as  it  would  be  in  vain  to  look  for  any  traces  of  chem 
istry  in  these  early  writings.  In  surgery  he  is  the  author  of  the  frequent 
ly  quoted  maxim,  that  "  what  can  not  be  cured  by  medicine  is  cured  by 
i  Greenhill,  I.  c.  2  Id.  ib. 


ATTIC     PERIOD.  357 

the  knife,  and  what  can  not  be  cured  by  the  knife  is  cured  by  fire."  The 
anatomical  knowledge  displayed  in  different  parts  of  the  Hippocratic  col 
lection  is  scanty  and  contradictory,  so  much  so,  that  the  discrepancies  on 
this  subject  constitute  an  important  criterion  in  deciding  the  genuineness 
of  the  different  treatises.1 

With  regard  to  the  personal  character  of  Hippocrates,  though  he  says 
little  or  nothing  about  himself,  yet  it  is  impossible  to  avoid  drawing  cer 
tain  conclusions  from  the  characteristic  passages  scattered  throughout 
his  writings.  He  was  evidently  a  person  who  not  only  had  had  great 
experience,  but  who  also  knew  how  to  turn  it  to  the  best  account,  and 
the  number  of  moral  reflections  and  apophthegms  that  we  meet  with  in 
his  pages,  some  of  which  (as,  for  example,  "  Life  is  short,  and  Art  is 
long")  have  acquired  a  sort  of  proverbial  notoriety,  show  him  to  have 
been  a  profound  thinker.  He  appears  to  have  felt  the  moral  obligations 
and  responsibilities  of  his  profession,  and  often  tries  to  impress  upon  his 
readers  the  duties  of  care  and  attention,  and  kindness  toward  the  sick, 
saying  that  a  physician's  first  and  chief  consideration  ought  to  be  the  re 
storing  of  his  patient  to  health.  The  style  of  the  Hippocratic  writings, 
which  are  in  the  Ionic  dialect,  is  so  concise  as  to  be  sometimes  extremely 
obscure  ;  though  this  charge,  which  is  as  old  as  the  time  of  Galen,  is  oft 
en  brought  .too  indiscriminately  against  the  whole  collection,  whereas  it 
applies,  in  fact,  especially  only  to  certain  treatises,  which  seem  to  be 
merely  a  collection  of  notes,  such  as  De  Humoribus,  De  Alimento,  De  Offici- 
na  Medici,  &c.  In  those  writings,  which  are  universally  allowed  to  be 
genuine,  we  do  not  find  this  excessive  brevity,  though  even  these  are,  in 
general,  by  no  means  easy.2 

EDITIONS,    ETC.,    OF    HIPPOCRATES. 

The  works  of  Hippocrates  first  appeared  in  a  Latin  translation  by  Fabius  Calvus, 
Rome,  1525,  fol.  The  first  Greek  edition  is  the  Aldine,  Venice,  1526,  fol.,  which  was 
printed  from  MSS.,  with  hardly  any  correction  of  the  transcriber's  errors.  The  first 
edition  that  had  any  pretensions  to  being  called  a  critical  edition  was  that  by  Hieron. 
Mercurialis,  Venice,  1588,  fol.,  Greek  and  Latin  ;  but  this  was  much  surpassed  by  that 
of  Foesius,  Frankfort,  1595,  fol.,  Greek  and  Latin,  which  continues  to  the  present  day  to 
be  the  best  complete  edition.  Van  der  Linden's  edition,  published  at  Leyden,  1665,  2 
vols.  8vo,  Greek  and  Latin,  is  neat,  and  commodious  for  reference,  from  his  having  di 
vided  the  text  into  short  paragraphs.  Chartier's  edition  of  the  works  of  Hippocrates  and 
Galen,  Paris,  1639-79,  13  vols.  fol.,  is  also  a  very  useful  and  neat  one.  It  contains  the 
whole  of  the  works  of  Hippocrates  and  Galen,  mixed  up  together,  and  divided  into  thir 
teen  classes,  according  to  the  subject-matter.  This  vast  work  was  undertaken  by  Ren6 
Chartier  (Renatus  Charterius),  a  French  physician,  who  published  in  1633  (when  he  had 
already  passed  his  sixtieth  year)  a  programme,  entitled  Index  Operum  Galeni,  quce  Lat- 
inis  duntaxat  typis  in  lucern  edita  sunt,  &c.,  begging  the  loan  of  such  Greek  MSS.  as  he 
had  not  an  opportunity  of  examining  in  the  public  libraries  of  Paris.  The  first  volume 
appeared  in  1639 ;  but  Chartier,  after  impoverishing  himself,  died  in  1654,  before  the 
work  was  completed :  the  last  four  volumes  were  published  after  his  death,  at  the  ex 
pense  of  his  son-in-law,  and  the  whole  work  was  at  length  finished  in  1679,  forty  years 
after  it  had  been  commenced.  This  edition  contains  a  Latin  translation  and  a  few  notes 
and  various  readings.  It  is,  however,  very  far  from  what  it  might  have  been,  and  its 
critical  merits  are  very  lightly  esteemed.  An  edition  of  Hippocrates  has  also  been  given 
by  Kiihn,  in  his  collection  of  the  works  of  the  Greek  medical  authors,  Leipzig,  1825-27, 
1  Orecnhill,  I.  c.  2  jj  Jb. 


358 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


3  vols.  8vo,  the  whole  collection  being  in  twenty-eight  volumes.  Kulm's  edition,  how 
ever,  has  very  small  claims  to  real  critical  merit,  its  principal  advantages  being  its  com 
modious  form,  the  reprint  of  Ackermann's  Histor.  Liter.  Hippocr.  (from  Harles's  edi 
tion  of  Fabricius's  Bibliotheca  Grasca)  in  the  first  volume,  and  the  noticing  on  each  page 
the  corresponding  pagination  of  the  editions  of  Foesius,  Chartier,  and  Van  der  Linden. 
By  far  the  best  edition,  however,  in  every  respect,  is  one  which  is  now  in  the  course  of 
publication  at  Paris,  under  the  superintendence  of  E.  Littre,  of  which  the  first  volume 
appeared  in  1839,  and  the  seventh  in  1850.  It  contains  a  new  text,  founded  upon  a  colla 
tion  of  the  MSS.  in  the  Royal  Library  at  Paris  ;  a  French  translation,  an  interesting  and 
learned  general  introduction,  and  a  copious  argument  prefixed  to  each  treatise,  together 
with  numerous  scientific  and  philological  notes.  It  is  a  work  quite  indispensable  to 
every  physician,  critic,  and  philologist  who  wishes  to  study  in  detail  the  works  of  the 
Hippocratic  collection,  and  it  has  already  done  much  more  toward  settling  the  text  than 
any  edition  that  has  preceded  it ;  but  at  the  same  time  it  must  not  be  concealed,  that  the 
editor  does  not  always  seem  to  have  made  the  best  use  of  the  materials  that  he  has  had 
at  his  command,  and  that  the  classical  reader  can  not  help  now  and  then  noticing  a 
manifest  want  of  a  critical,  and  even  at  times  of  grammatical  scholarship.1 

Of  some  of  the  separate  works  we  may  notice  the  following  editions  :  Prognostica,  in 
Greek,  with  a  French  translation,  notes,  &c.,  by  M.  De  Mercy,  Paris,  1815,  12mo.  Aph- 
orismi,  in  Greek,  with  a  French  translation,  notes,  &c.,  by  M.  De  Mercy,  Paris,  1811, 
8vo ;  by  Hecker,  Greek  and  Latin,  Berlin,  1822, 12mo ;  by  De  Bergen,  Greek  and  Latin, 
Leipzig,  1841,  8vo;  by  Menke,  in  Greek,  with  a  German  version,  Bremen,  1844,  8vo. 
Epidemia,  in  Greek,  with  a  French  version,  notes,  &c.,  by  M.  De  Mercy,  Paris,  1815,  8vo  ; 
by  Freind,  Greek  and  Latin,  London,  1717,  4to.  De  Diceta  Acutorum,  in  Greek,  with  a 
French  version,  notes,  &c.,  by  M.  De  Mercy,  Paris,  1818, 12mo.  De  Aere,  Aquis  et  Locis, 
in  Greek,  with  a  French  version,  notes,  &c.,  by  Coraes,  Paris,  1800,  2  vols.  12mo  ;  by  M. 
De  Mercy,  Paris,  1818, 12mo ;  by  Petersen,  Hamburg,  1833,  8vo. 

Among  the  great  number  of  works  published  on  the  subject  of  the  Hippocratic  collec 
tion,  or  as  aids  for  the  perusal  of  Hippocrates,  may  be  mentioned  Foesii  CEconomia  Hip- 
pocratis,  a  very  copious  and  learned  lexicon  to  Hippocrates,  published  in  folio,  Frank 
fort,  1588,  and  Geneva,  1662;  Sprengel,  Apologie  des  Hippokr.  und  seiner  Grundsd'tze, 
Leipzig,  1789, 1792,  2  vols.  8vo ;  Ermerius,  De  Hippocr.  doctrina  a  Prognostics  oriunda, 
Leyden,  1832,  4to ;  Houdart,  Etudes  Histor.  et  Crit.  sur  la  vie  et  la  doctrine  d'Hippocrate, 
Paris,  1836,  8vo  ;  Petersen,  Hippocr.  nomine  quas  circumferuntur  scripta,  ad  temporis  rati- 
ones  disposita,  Hamburg,  1839,  4to  ;  Meixner,  Neue  Prufung  der  Aechtheit  und  Reihefolge 
sammtlicher  Schriften  Hippokr.,  Miinchen,  1836, 1837,  8vo. 

1  Grecnhill;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  Hippocrates. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD. 


359 


CHAPTER  XXXVII. 
FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD. 

INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS.1 

I.  THE  Fifth  or  Alexandrine  period  of  Greek  literature  may  be  dated 
from  the  foundation  of  Alexandrea,  and  ends  with  the  fall  of  the  Grseco- 
Egyptian  empire  under  the  power  of  Rome.     We  have  already,  in  a  few 
instances,  anticipated  the  commencement  of  this  period,  especially  as 
regards  the  subject  of  Grecian  philosophy,  though  not,  it  is  hoped,  to  such 
a  degree  as  at  all  to  mar  the  leading  features  of  our  arrangement. 

II.  In  the  previous  period,  Athens,  as  we  have  seen,  was  the  chief  seat 
of  letters  and  the  arts.    In  the  one  on  which  we  are  now  entering, that  dis 
tinction  is  enjoyed  by  the  new  capital  of  Egypt.     The  admirable  situation 
which  it  possessed  for  commercial  operations,  its  great  wealth,  and,  above 
all,  the  munificent  patronage  of  the  first  Ptolemies,  all  tended  to  make 
Alexandrea  the  centre  of  refinement,  and  the  chief  resort  of  literary  and 
scientific  men.     But  though  an  asylum  was  thus  afforded  for  the  peace 
ful  culture  of  literature  and  science,  away  from  the  turbulent  and  distract 
ing  scenes  of  the  mother  country,  and  though  many  and  rich  appliances 
were  brought  to  bear  upon  this  great  end  by  the  generous  liberality  of 
the  first  three  monarchs  of  the  house  of  Lagus,  yet  nothing  could  replace 
the  taste,  and  the  genius,  and  the  true  intellectual  spirit  which  had  shone 
so  conspicuously  in  the  productions  of  the  previous  or  Attic  age.     Study 
was  now  called  in  to  supply  what  nature  no  longer  furnished.     The  circle 
of  acquirements  was  now  carefully  traced,  by  the  mastering  of  which 
alone  one  could  aspire  to  the  title  of  a  literary  man.     Men  of  genius  were 
now  few,  men  of  learning  became  numerous. 

III.  It  was  during  this  same  period  that  a  taste  for  verbal  criticism 
arose,  which  was  applied  in  the  first  instance  to  the  poems  of  Homer, 
and  wholly  confined  to  them,  but  subsequently  extended  to  the  produc 
tions  of  later  ages.     All  these  furnished  an  inexhaustible  subject  for  ex 
planations,  illustrations,  commentaries,  and  scholia  ;  and  in  this  way  his 
tory  and  fable,  chronology  and  inscriptions,  the  manners  and  the  customs 
of  earlier  times,  all  were  laid  under  contribution  for  the  purpose  of  clear 
ing  up  passages  and  words  that  might  present  any  difficulty,  or  that  might 
afford  an  opportunity  of  making  a  display  of  varied  acquirements.     Re 
searches  were  also  made  into  the  Greek  tongue ;  what  the  usage  and 
authority  of  the  great  masters  had  consecrated  was  now  reduced  to  the 
form  of  principles  ;  collections  were  made  of  words  either  little  used,  or 
employed  in  a  peculiar  sense ;  the  dialects  were  distinguished  from  one 
another,  and  their  characteristics  noted ;  in  a  word,  philology,  a  science 
before  unknown,  now  first  arose ;  and  criticism  began  to  trace  out  the 

i  Matter,  Histoire  de  I'Ecole  cC Alexandrie,  &c.,  Paris,  1840-44,  2  vols.  8vo,  2e  ed, ; 
School!,  Hist,  de  la  Litterature  Grecque  Profane,  tome  iii.,  p.  38,  seqq. 


360  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

limits  beyond  which  the  imagination  was  forbidden  to  soar,  as  well  as  the 
rules  by  which  her  flight  was  to  be  directed. 

IV.  This,  too,  was  the  period  of  the  so-called  seven  liberal  arts,  an  ap 
pellation  under  which  were  comprehended  Grammar,  Rhetoric,  Dialectics, 
Arithmetic,  Geometry,  Astronomy,  and  Music.     In  proportion,  however,  as 
erudition  extended  her  domain,  and  men  began  to  reason  about  the  prin 
ciples  of  the  beautiful,  literature  declined,  and  the  chaste  simplicity,  un 
affected  grace,  and  energy  of  expression  that  had  marked  the  purer  ages 
of  Grecian  composition  gave  place  to  studied  imitation  or  far-fetched 
conceits  ;  to  affectation,  false  refinement,  and  vain  display  of  erudition. 
There  were,  it  is  true,  some  striking  exceptions  to  this,  but  they  were 
mere  exceptions,  exercising  little  if  any  influence  on  the  vicious  taste  of 
the  age.1 

V.  A  peculiar  invention  of  this  erudite  age  was  the  canon  of  classical 
authors,  as  it  was  termed,  arranged  by  Aristophanes  of  Byzantium,  cura 
tor  of  the  Alexandrean  library  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Euergetes,  and  his 
celebrated  disciple  Aristarchus.     The  daily  increasing  multitude  of  books 
of  every  kind  had  now  become  so  great  that  there  was  no  expression, 
however  faulty,  for  which  some  precedent  might  not  be  found ;  and  as 
there  were  far  more  bad  than  good  writers,  the  authority  and  weight  of 
numbers  was  likely  to  prevail,  and  the  language,  consequently,  to  grow 
more  and  more  corrupt.     It  was  thought  necessary,  therefore,  to  draw  a 
line  between  those  classic  writers  to  whose  authority  an  appeal  in  mat 
ters  of  language  might  be  made  and  the  common  herd  of  inferior  authors.2 
The  canon  of  the  Alexandrean  grammarians,  then,  was  as  follows  : 

ALEXANDRINE     CANON. 

1.  EPIC  POETS.   The  Epic  poets  contained  in  the  canon  were  HO 
MER,  HESIOD,  PISANDER,  PANYASIS,  and  ANTIMACHUS,  arranged,  like  the 
other  writers  to  be  mentioned  under  the  different  heads,  in  the  order  of 
time. 

2.  IAMBIC  POETS.   These  were  ARCHILOCHUS,  SIMONIDES,  and  Hir- 

PONAX. 

3.  LYRIC  POETS.   These  were  nine  in  number :  ALCMAN,  ALC^SUS, 
SAPPHO,  STESICHORUS,  PINDAR,  BACCHYLIDES,  IBYCUS,  ANACREON,  and  Si- 

(  MONIDES. 

4.  ELEGIAC  POETS.    Four  in  number :  CALLINUS,  MIMNERMUS,  Pm- 
LETAS,  and  CALLIMACHUS. 

5.  TRAGIC  POETS.    Of  these  they  made  two  classes.     In  the  first 
class  were  ^ESCHYLUS,  SOPHOCLES,  EURIPIDES,  ION,  ACH^US,  and  AGA- 
THON.     In  the  second  class,  ALEXANDER  the  JEtolian,  PHILISCUS  of  Corcyra, 
SOSITHEUS,  HOMER  the  younger,  ^EANTIDES,  SOSIPHANES,  and  LYCOPHRON. 
As  the  poets  of  this  second  class  were  seven  in  number,  they  were  also 
called  the  TRAGIC  PLEIADES,  from  the  number  usually  assigned  to  those 
stars. 

6.  COMIC  POETS.    The  poets  of  the  Old  Comedy  comprehended  in  the 
canon  were  EPICHARMUS,  EUPOLIS,  ARISTOPHANES,  PHERECRATES,  and  PLA- 

1  Sckoell,  p.  41.        2  Moore,  Lectures  on  Gr.  JMng.  and  Lit.,  p.  55  ;  Sclvoell,  p.  185,  seqq. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  36i 

TO.     Of  the  Middle  Comedy,  ANTIFHANES  and  ALEXIS.     Of  the  New  Come 
dy,  MENANDER,  PHILIPPIDES,  DIPHILUS,  PHILEMON,  and  APOLLODORUS. 

7.  HISTORIANS.    These  were  HERODOTUS,  THUCYDIDES,  XENOPHON, 
THEOPOMPUS,  EPHORUS,  PHILISTU.S,  ANAXIMENES,  and  CALLISTHENES. 

8.  ORATORS.    These  were  ten  in  number :   ANTIPHON,  ANDOCIDES, 
LYSIAS,  ISOCRATES,  IS^EUS,  ^ESCHINES,  LYCURGUS,  DEMOSTHENES,  HYPERI- 
DES,  and  DINARCHUS. 

9.  PHILOSOPHERS.    These  were  PLATO,  XENOPHON,  ^ESCHINBS  So- 
craticus,  ARISTOTLE,  and  THEOPHRASTUS. 

A  list  was  subsequently  made  of  seven  distinguished  poets  of  this  same 
period,  who  were  contemporaries,  and  were  called,  from  their  number, 
the  POETIC  PLEIADES.  Their  names  were  APOLLONIUS  Rhodius, 
ARATUS,  PHILISCUS,  HOMER  the  younger,  LYCOPHRON,  NICANDER,  and  THE 
OCRITUS. 

VI.  Of  the  seventy-Jive  authors  included  in  this  list  there  are  but  twenty- 
five  of  whom  we  now  possess  any  remains  that  deserve  mention.     As 
regards  the  list  or  canon  itself,  while  it  can  not  be  denied  that  it  contrib 
uted  to  preserve  for  some  time  the  purity  of  the  language,  it  must  at  the 
same  time  be  acknowledged  that  it  operated  injuriously  in  excluding  a 
large  number  of  writers  who  might  have  furnished  us  with  valuable  ma 
terials  for  becoming  better  acquainted  with  the  actual  condition  of  Greece 
at  the  time,  as  well  as  the  state  of  her  literature,  but  whose  works  have 
perished  in  consequence  of  the  neglect  occasioned  by  their  exclusion  from 
the  canon.     Some  of  them,  indeed,  were  in  all  likelihood  justly  entitled 
to  a  place  in  the  canon  itself.1 

VII.  The  founder  of  the  Alexandrine  school  was  Ptolemy  I.,  commonly 
called  Soter.     It  was  this  monarch  who  first  established  the  famous  libra 
ry,  and  erected  the  Museum,  with  its  theatre  for  lectures  and  public  as 
semblies,  connected  with  one  another,  and  with  the  palace  of  the  Ptole 
mies  by  long  colonnades  of  the  most  costly  marble  from  the  Egyptian 
quarries,  and  adorned  with  obelisks  and  sphinxes  taken  from  the  Phara- 
onic  cities.     The  library  contained,  according  to  one  account,  700,000 
volumes ;  according  to  another,  400,000. 2     Part,  however,  of  this  unri 
valled  collection  was  lodged  in  the  temple  of  Serapis,  in  the  quarter  of 
Alexandrea  called  Rhacotis.     Here  were  deposited  the  200,000  volumes 
collected  by  the  kings  of  Pergamus  and  presented  by  Antony  to  Cleopa 
tra.     The  library  of  the  Museum  was  destroyed  during  the  blockade  of 
Julius  Caesar  in  the  Brucheum ;  that  in  the  temple  of  Serapis  was  fre 
quently  injured  by  the  civil  broils  of  Alexandrea,  and  especially  when 
that  temple  was  destroyed  by  the  Christian  fanatics  in  the  fourth  centu 
ry  of  our  era.     The  collection  begun  by  Ptolemy  Soter  was  augmented 
by  his  successors,  for  the  worst  of  the  Lagidae  were  patrons  of  literature, 
but  more  particularly  by  his  two  immediate  successors,  Philadelphus  and 
Euergetes.     The  portion  that  remained  after  the  time  of  Caesar  was  re 
spected,  if  not  increased  by  the  Roman  emperors,  who,  like  their  prede 
cessors,  appointed  and  salaried  the  librarians  and  professors  of  the  Mu 
seum.     The  Ptolemies  replenished  the  shelves  of  the  library  zealously 

1  Schoell,  p.  187.  2  Joseph.,  Antiq.,  xii.,2;  Athen.,  i.,  p.  3. 

Q 


362  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

but  unscrupulously,  since  they  laid  an  embargo  on  all  books,  whether 
public  or  private  property,  which  were  brought  to  Alexandrea,  retained 
the  originals,  and  gave  copies  of  them  to  their  proper  owners.  In  this 
same  spirit  Ptolemy  Euergetes  (B.C.  246-221)  is  said  to  have  got  pos 
session  of  authentic  copies  of  the  works  of  ^Eschylus,  Sophocles,  and 
Euripides,  and  to  have  returned  transcripts  of  them  to  the  Athenians, 
from  whom  they  had  been  borrowed,  with  an  accompanying  compensa 
tion  of  fifteen  talents.1 

VIII.  The  Museum  succeeded  the  once-renowned  college  of  Heliopolis 
as  the  University  of  Egypt.     It  contained  a  great  hall  or  banqueting-room 
(O!KOS  peyas),  where  the  professors  dined  in  common  ;  an  exterior  peri 
style,  or  corridor  (TreptiraToi),  for  exercise  and  ambulatory  lectures ;  a  the 
atre  where  public  disputations  and  scholastic  festivals  were  held  ;  cham 
bers  for  the  different  professors ;  and  it  possessed  a  botanical  garden, 
which  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  enriched  with  tropical  flora  and  a  menagerie. 
It  was  divided  into  four  principal  sections — poetry,  mathematics,  astron 
omy,  and  medicine — and  enrolled  among  its  professors  or  pupils  the  illus 
trious  names  of  Euclid,  Ctesibius,  Callimachus,  Aratus,  Aristophanes,  and 
Aristarchus,  the  two  Heros,  Ammonius  Saccas,  Polemo,  Clemens,  Origen, 
Athanasius,  Theon  and  his  celebrated  daughter  Hypatia,  with  many  oth 
ers.     Amid  the  turbulent  factions  and  frequent  calamities  of  Alexandrea, 
the  Museum  maintained  its  reputation  until  the  Saracen  invasion  in  A.D. 
640.     The  Roman  emperors  of  the  West  and  East,  like  their  predeces 
sors  the  Ptolemies,  kept  in  their  own  hands  the  nomination  of  the  presi 
dent  of  the  Museum,  who  was  considered  one  of  the  four  chief  magistrates 
of  the  city.2 

IX.  Alexandrea,  however,  did  not  continue,  during  all  the  period  which 
we  are  now  considering,  the  exclusive  seat  of  letters.     The  city  of  Per- 
gamus,  in  Mysia,  the  capital  of  the  kingdom  of  the  same  name,  also  at 
tained  to  high  rank  as  a  place  of  literary  culture,  under  the  fostering  care 
of  Eumenes  II.,  who  came  to  the  throne  in  B.C.  197.     It  was  here  that 
he  founded  the  celebrated  library,  which  rose  to  be  a  rival  even  to  that 
of  Alexandrea.     The  jealousy  which  this  excited  showed  itself  in  a  de 
cree  prohibiting  the  exportation  of  papyrus  from  Egypt,  passed  in  the 
reign  of  Ptolemy  Epiphanes.3     The  kings  of  Pergamus  were  obliged, 
therefore,  to  substitute  what,  either  from  their  use  of  it  in  this  way,  or 
from  some  improvement  in  the  mode  of  preparing  it  at  Pergamus,  was 
called  Trepyawvri  (soil.  x<*PT7?)>   Charta  Pergamena,  or  parchment.      We 
must  guard,  however,  against  the  error  of  some,  who  make  Eumenes  II. 
to  have  been  the  inventor  of  this,  since  Herodotus  expressly  mentions 
writing  on  skins  as  common  in  his  time,  and  says  that  the  lonians  had 
been  accustomed  to  give  the  name  of  skins  (SiQOepai)  to  books.*    To  the 
court  of  Pergamus,  now,  the  learned  were,  by  the  liberality  of  its  princes, 
attracted  from  every  quarter ;  and  its  school  might  have  vied  with  that 
of  Alexandrea,  but  for  the  check  it  received  from  the  bequest  by  Attalus 
of  his  kingdom  to  the  Romans.     After  this  transfer  it  did  but  languish 

1  Matter,  vol.  i.,  p.  43,  seqq. ;  Smith,  Diet.  Gnogr.,  s.  v.  Alexandrea,  p.  97. 

••>  Smith,  Dirt.  Geofr..  I.  c.  *  Pirn..  H.  N..  xiii..  21.  *  Herod.,*.,  59. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  363 

feebly,  until  Antony  struck  it  a  death-blow  by  removing  thence  the  noble 
collection  of  200,000  volumes  left  by  Attalus,  and  transporting  them  to 
Alexandrea,  where,  as  already  remarked,  they  were  deposited  in  the 
temple  of  Serapis. 

X.  Another  rival  of  Alexandrea  rose,  at  a  somewhat  later  period,  in 
Tarsus,  a  city  of  Cilicia,  the  birth-place  of  St.  Paul.     The  people  of  Tar 
sus  were  celebrated  for  their  mental  power,  their  readiness  in  repartee, 
and  their  fondness  for  the  study  of  philosophy ;  and  their  schools  in  this 
department,  as  well  as  in  the  whole  circle  of  the  sciences,  were  not  less 
famous  than  those  of  Athens  and  Alexandrea.     Strabo,  indeed,  says,  with 
somewhat  of  exaggeration,  that  they  even  surpassed  them. 

XI.  In  giving  an  account  of  the  writers  of  the  Alexandrine  period,  we 
will  consider  them  under  the  two  general  heads  of  Poetry  and  Prose. 


CHAPTER  XXXVIII. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD— continued. 
POETRY. 

I.  THE  poets  who  flourished  during  the  period  on  which  we  have  now 
entered  were,  generally  speaking,  learned  men,  but  deficient  in  imagina 
tion,  and  often  also  in  good  taste.     The  former  of  these  defects  they 
sought  to  hide  beneath  singularity  of  idea,  and  novelty  and  extravagance 
of  expression,  while  the  bad  taste  of  some  of  them  displayed  itself  in 
their  choice  of  subjects  still  more  than  their  manner  of  treating  them.     It 
was  during  this  period,  also,  that  several  new  kinds  of  poetry  came  into 
vogue,  if  it  is  permitted  us  to  apply  the  name  of  poetry  to  such  things  as 
anagrams,  jeux  de  mots,  and  other  frivolities,  which  correct  taste  con 
demns,  but  which  were  then  admired  as  efforts  of  genius. 

II.  Still,  in  the  midst  of  this  general  corruption  of  taste,  a  small  num 
ber  of  poets  remained  faithful,  in  a  great  degree,  to  the  ancient  models  ; 
and  although  it  was  impossible  for  them  to  rise  in  all  things  above  the 
influence  of  the  age,  yet  their  productions  are  marked  by  a  purity  of  dic 
tion,  and  a  certain  air  of  elegance,  which  places  them  at  a  wide  distance 
from  their  contemporaries,  as  well  as  from  their  successors.1 

III.  The  poetry  of  the  period  now  under  review  will  be  considered  as 
follows  :   1.  EPIC  POETRY,  subdivided  into  the  Heroic  Epos  and  the  Didac 
tic  Epos.     2.  LYRIC  POETRY,  in  the  more  general  acceptation  of  the  term, 
embracing  both  Elegiac  and  Melic  composition.     3.  BUCOLIC  POETRY,  form 
ing  a  new  species  of  poetic  writing,  in  part  possessing  an  epic  element, 
and  therefore  composed  in  hexameters,  and  in  part  marked  by  a  dramatic 
character.     4.  DRAMATIC  POETRY. 

i  Schcell,  p.  84. 


364  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


I.     EPIC     POETRY. 
(A.)    THE    HEROIC    EPOS. 

The  most  distinguished  Epic  poets  of  the  heroic  school  belonging  to 
this  period  are  Rhianus,  Apollonius,  and  Euphorion. 

I.  RHIANUS  ("Piav6s)?  an  Alexandrean  poet  and  grammarian,  was  a  na 
tive  of  Crete,  and  flourished  about  B.C.  222.    He  was  first,  as  Suidas  in 
forms  us,  a  slave  and  keeper  of  a  palaestra,  but  afterward,  having  been 
instructed,  he  became  a  grammarian.  -  The  statement  of  Suidas,  that  he 
was  contemporary  with  Eratosthenes,  not  only  indicates  the  time  at 
which  he  lived,  but  suggests  the  probability  that  he  lived  at  Alexandrea 
in  personal  and  literary  connection  with  Eratosthenes.     On  the  ground 
of  this  statement,  Clinton  fixes  the  age  of  Rhianus  at  B.C.  222,  as  we 
have  given  it  above.    He  wrote  several  epic  poems,  the  subjects  of  which 
were  taken  either  from  the  old  mythology,  or  from  the  annals  of  particu 
lar  states  and  countries.     Of  the  former  class  were  his  'Hpa/cAeta,  and  of 
the  latter  his  'AxaiW,  'H\ta/ca,  ©ea-a-aAi/ca,  and  Me<rcr?ji/iaKa.     For  a  full  ac 
count  of  the  extant  fragments  of  his  poems,  and  for  a  discussion  of  their 
subjects,  the'  student  is  referred  to  Meineke's  eesay  on  Rhianus,  in  his 
Analecta  Alexandrina.     Like  most  of  the  Alexandrine  poets,  Rhianus  was 
also  a  writer  of  epigrams.     Ten  of  his  epigrams  are  preserved  in  the 
Palatine  Anthology,  and  one  by  Athenaeus.     They  treat  of  amatory  sub 
jects  with  much  freedom,  but  they  all  excel  in  elegance  of  language, 
cleverness  of  invention,  and  simplicity  of  expression.    He  had  a  place  in 
the  garland  of  Meleager.     The  epic  poems  of  Rhianus,  however,  were 
those  of  his  works  to  which  he  chiefly  owed  his  fame.     His  poems  are 
mentioned  by  Suetonius  as  among  those  productions  of  the  Alexandrean 
school  which  the  Emperor  Tiberius  admired  and  imitated.     Respecting 
his  grammatical  works,  we  only  know  that  he  is  frequently  quoted  in  the 
Scholia  on  Homer  as  one  of  the  commentators  on  that  poet. 

The  fragments  of  Rhianus  have  been  printed  in  most  of  the  old  collections  of  the  Greek 
poets,  and  in  Gaisford's  Poetce  Minores  Greed.  They  are  separately  edited  by  Saal,  in 
an  excellent  monograph,  Bonn,  1831,  8vo  (a  review  of  which  by  Schneidewin  is  con 
tained  in  Jahn's  Jahrbiicher  for  1833,  vol.  ix.,  p.  129,  seqq.) ;  and,  as  already  mentioned, 
by  Meineke  in  his  Analecta  Alexandrina,  Berlin,  1843,  8vo. 

II.  APOLLONIUS  RHODIUS  ('A7roAAc£j/ios  6  'P<*5tos),2  a  poet  and  grammarian, 
was  born  at  Alexandrea,3  or,  according  to  one  account,  at  Naucratis,*  on 
the  eastern  bank  of  the  Canopic  branch  of  the  Nile,  and  flourished  in  the 
reigns  of  Ptolemy  Philopator  and  Ptolemy  Epiphanes  (B.C.  222-181).     In 
his  youth  he  was  instructed  by  Callimachus,  but  they  afterward  became 
bitter  enemies.     The  most  probable  cause  of  this  hatred  appears  to  be, 
that  Apollonius,  in  his  love  of  the  simplicity  of  the  ancient  poets  of 
Greece,  and  in  his  endeavor  to  imitate  them,  offended  Callimachus,  or 
perhaps  even  expressed  contempt  for  his  poetry.    The  love  of  Apollonius 
for  the  ancient  epic  poetry  was  indeed  so  great,  and  it  had  such  fascina 
tions  for  him,  that  even  when  a  youth  (e^jSos)  he  began  himself  an  epic 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib. 

3  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  655.  *  Athtn.,  vii.,  p.  283  :  JElian,  Hint.  An.,  xv.,  23. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  365 

poem  on  the  expedition  of  the  Argonauts.  When  at  length  the  work  was 
completed,  he  read  it  in  public  at  Alexandrea,  but  it  did  not  meet  with  the 
approbation  of  the  audience.  The  cause  of  this  may,  in  part,  have  been 
the  imperfect  character  of  the  work  itself,  which  was  only  a  youthful  at 
tempt  ;  but  it  was  more  especially  owing  to  the  intrigues  of  the  other 
Alexandrine  poets,  and,  above  all,  of  Callimachus,  for  Apollonius  was,  in 
some  degree,  opposed  to  the  taste  which  then  prevailed  at  Alexandrea  in 
regard  to  poetry.  Apollonius  was  deeply  hurt  at  this  failure,  and  it  is 
not  improbable  that  the  bitter  epigram  on  Callimachus,  which  is  still  ex 
tant,1  was  written  at  that  time.  Callimachus,  in  return,  wrote  an  invective 
poem,  called  "  Ibis,"  against  Apollonius,  of  the  nature  of  which  we  may 
form  some  idea  from  Ovid's  imitation  of  it  in  a  poem  of  the  same  name. 
Disheartened  by  these  circumstances,  Apollonius  left  Alexandrea  and 
went  to  Rhodes,  where  he  taught  rhetoric  with  so  much  success  that  the 
Rhodians  honored  him  with  their  franchise  and  other  distinctions.  Here, 
also,  he  revised  his  poem  and  read  it  to  the  Rhodians,  who  received  it 
with  great  approbation.  Apollonius  now  regarded  himself  as  a  Rhodian, 
and  the  surname  Rhodius  ('P6Sios)  has  at  all  times  been  the  one  by  which 
he  has  been  distinguished  from  other  persons  of  the  same  name. 

Notwithstanding  these  distinctions,  however,  he  afterward  returned 
to  Alexandrea ;  but  it  is  not  known  whether  he  did  so  of  his  own  accord 
or  in  consequence  of  an  invitation.  He  is  said  to  have  now  read  his  re 
vised  poem  to  the  Alexandreans,  who  were  so  delighted  with  it,  that  he 
at  once  rose  to  the  highest  degree  of  fame  and  popularity.  According  to 
Suidas,  Apollonius  succeeded  Eratosthenes  as  chief  librarian  of  the  muse 
um  of  Alexandrea,  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  about  B.C.  194. 
Farther  particulars  about  his  life  are  not  mentioned,  but  it  is  probable 
that  he  held  his  office  in  the  museum  until  his  death,  and  one  of  his  biog 
raphers  states  that  he  was  buried  in  the  same  tomb  with  Callimachus. 

The  poem  on  the  expedition  of  the  Argonauts,  entitled  'ApyovavrtKd,  is 
still  extant.  It  consists  of  four  books.  The  materials  for  it  were  collect 
ed  by  Apollonius  from  the  rich  libraries  of  Alexandrea,  and  his  scholiasts 
are  always  anxious  to  point  out  the  sources  from  which  he  derived  this 
or  that  account.  The  poem  gives  a  straightforward  and  simple  descrip 
tion  of  the  adventure,  and  in  a  tone  which  is  equal  throughout.  Hence 
Longinus,2  in  his  treatise  on  the  Sublime,  calls  Apollonius  forTonroy,  an 
expression  that  is  well  elucidated  by  the  remark  of  Quintilian  on  this 
same  writer :  "  Non  contemnendum  edidit  opus,  cequali  quadam  mediocri- 
tate."3  He  never  rises  to  the  sublime,  but,  at  the  same  time,  never  de 
scends  to  the  vulgar  and  lowly.  The  episodes,  which  are  not  numer 
ous,  and  which  contain  particular  mythi  or  descriptions  of  countries,  are 
sometimes  very  beautiful,  and  give  life  and  color  to  the  whole  poem. 
The  character  of  Jason,  although  he  is  the  hero  of  the  poem,  is  not  suffi 
ciently  developed  to  win  the  interest  of  the  reader.  The  character  of 
Medea,  on  the  other  hand,  is  beautifully  drawn,  and  the  gradual  growth 
of  her  love  is  described  with  a  truly  artistic  moderation.  The  language 
is  an  imitation  of  that  of  Homer ;  but  it  is  more  brief  and  concise,  and 

1  Anthol.  GraBC.,  xi.,  275.  *  Df  Subl,  33.  3  Quint.,  10,  1,  54. 


366  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

has  all  the  symptoms  of  something  that  is  studied  and  not  natural  to  the 
poet.  The  Argonautica,  in  short,  is  a  work  of  art  and  labor,  and  thus 
forms,  notwithstanding  its  many  resemblances,  a  contrast  with  the  easy 
and  natural  flow  of  the  Homeric  poems.  On  its  appearance,  the  work 
seems  to  have  made  a  great  sensation,  for  even  contemporaries,  such  as 
Charon,  wrote  commentaries  upon  it.  Our  present  scholia  are  abridg 
ments  of  the  commentaries  of  Lucillus  of  Crete,  Sophocles,  and  Theon, 
all  of  whom  seem  to  have  lived  before  the  Christian  era.  The  common 
scholia  on  Apollonius  are  called  the  Florentine  scholia,  because  they  were 
first  published  at  Florence,  and  to  distinguish  them  from  the  Paris  scholia, 
which  were  first  published  in  Schaefer's  edition  of  the  Argonautica,  and 
consist  chiefly  of  verbal  explanations  and  criticisms.  Among  the  Romans 
the  Argonautica  was  much  read,  and  P.  Terentius  Varro  Atacinus  ac 
quired  great  reputation  by  his  translation  of  it.  The  Argonautica  of 
Valerius  Flaccus  is  a  free  imitation  of  the  poem  of  Apollonius. 

Besides  the  Argonautica,  Apollonius  wrote  epigrams  (of  which  we  pos 
sess  only  the  one  on  Callimachus),  and  also  several  other  works  which 
are  now  lost.  Two  of  them,  Ilepl  'Apx^oxou  and  Tlpbs  Zr]v65oTov,  were 
probably  grammatical  works,  and  the  latter  may  have  had  reference  to 
the  recension  of  the  Homeric  poems  by  Zenodotus,  for  the  scholia  on 
Homer  occasionally  refer  to  Apollonius.  A  third  class  of  Apollonius's 
writings  were  his  Krurets,  that  is,  poems  on  the  origin  or  foundation  of 
several  towns.  These  poems  were  of  an  historico-epic  character,  and 
most  of  them  seem  to  have  been  written  in  hexameter  verse.  A  few 
lines  only  are  preserved. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Argonautica  is  that  of  Florence,  1496,  4to,  by  Lascaris,  which 
contains  the  scholia.  The  next  is  the  Aldine,  Venice,  1581,  8vo,  which  is  little  more 
than  a  reprint  of  the  Florentine  edition.  The  first  really  critical  edition  is  that  of  Brunck, 
Strasburg,  1780,  4to  and  8vo.  The  edition  of  Beck,  Leipzig,  1797,  8vo,  is  incomplete,  and 
the  only  volume  which  appeared  of  it  contains  the  text,  with  a  Latin  translation,  and  a 
few  critical  notes.  Schaefer  published  an  edition,  Leipzig,  1810-13,  2  vols.  8vo,  which  is 
an  improvement  upon  that  of  Brunck,  and  is  the  first  in  which  the  Paris  scholia  are  print 
ed.  The  best  edition  is  that  of  Wellauer,  Leipzig,  1828,  2  vols.  8vo,  containing  the  vari 
ous  readings  of  thirteen  MSS.,  the  scholia,  and  short  notes.  The  edition  of  Lehrs,  in 
Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graca,  containing  merely  the  text  and  a  Latin  version,  is  based  upon 
that  of  Wellauer,  though  occasionally  exhibiting  better  readings.  For  farther  informa 
tion  on  the  subject  of  Apollonius,  the  student  may  consult  Gerhard,  Lectiones  Apolloni- 
ana,  Leipzig,  1816,  8vo,  and  Weichert,  Ueber  das  Leben  und  Gedicht  des  Apollonius  von 
Rhodus,  Meissen,  1821,  8vo. 

III.  EUPHORION  (Et^opiW),1  of  Chalcis,  in  Eubcea,  was  an  eminent 
grammarian  and  poet,  and  was  born  about  B.C.  274.  He  became  the 
librarian  of  Antiochus  the  Great,  B.C.  221,  and  died  in  Syria,  either  at 
Apamea  or  Antioch.  Euphorion  wrote  numerous  works,  both  in  poetry 
and  prose,  relating  chiefly  to  mythological  history.  The  following  were 
poems  in  heroic  verse:  1.  'H<n'o5os,  probably  an  agricultural  poem.  2. 
,  Mo^oTria,  so  called  from  an  old  name  of  Attica,  the  legends  of  which  coun 
try  seem  to  have  been  the  chief  subject  of  the  poem.  From  the  variety 
of  its  contents,  which  Suidas  calls  ffv/j./j.iye'is  la-Topiai,  it  was  also  termed 
y  a  title  frequently  given  to  the  writings  of  that  period.  3.  XiXtd- 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr,  s.  v. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  36? 

5«,  a  poem  written  against  certain  persons  who  had  defrauded  Euphori- 
on  of  money  which  he  had  intrusted  to  their  care.  It  probably  derived 
its  title  from  each  of  its  books  consisting  of  a  thousand  verses.  Eupho- 
rion  was  an  epigrammatist  as  wrell  as  an  epic  poet.  He  had  a  place  in 
the  Garland  of  Meleager,  and  the  Greek  Anthology  contains  two  epigrams 
by  him.  His  epigrams  appear  to  have  been  mostly  erotic,  and  were  imi 
tated  by  Propertius,  Tibullus,  and  Gallus,  as  also  by  the  Emperor  Tiberi 
us,  with  whom  he  was  a  favorite  writer.  He  composed,  also,  many  his 
torical  and  grammatical  works.  Euphorion  seems  to  have  carried  to 
excess  some  of  the  worst  faults  of  the  Alexandrean  school.  He  was 
particularly  distinguished  by  an  obscurity,  arising,  according  to  Meiiieke, 
from  his  choice  of  the  most  out-of-the-way  subjects,  from  the  cumbrous 
learning  with  which  he  overloaded  his  poems,  from  the  arbitrary  changes 
which  he  made  in  the  common  legends,  from  his  choice  of  obsolete  words, 
and  from  his  employment  of  ordinary  words  with  a  new  meaning  of  his 
own.  Only  some  fragments  remain  of  his  numerous  works,  collected  by 
Meineke  in  his  Analecta  Alexandrina,  Berlin,  1843. 

(B.)    THE     DIDACTIC    EPOS. 

I.  The  epic  form  of  verse  was  not  confined  to  heroic  themes,  but  was 
often  employed  in  the  elucidation  of  subjects  of  a  scientific  nature,  as, 
for  example,  geography,  astronomy,  agriculture,  and  other  similar  topics. 
The  scientific  material  was  always,  of  course,  regarded  as  of  primary  im 
portance,  but  still  the  writer  strove,  at  the  same  time,  after  a  pleasing 
form  of  poetical  expression.     And  yet,  after  all,  many  of  these  so-called 
poems  deserve  rather  to  be  regarded  as  a  species  of  versified  text-books 
than  regular  works  of  art. 

II.  The  didactic  epic  poets  of  the  Alexandrine  period  most  deserving 
of  notice  are  Aratus  and  Nicander. 

1.  ARATUS  ("Aparos)1  was  a  native  of  Soli,  afterward  Pompeiopolis,  in 
Cilicia,  or  (according  to  one  authority)  of  Tarsus,  and  flourished  B.C.  270. 
He  was  invited  to  the  court  of  Antigonus  Gonatas,  king  of  Macedonia, 
where  he  spent  all  the  latter  part  of  his  life.  His  chief  pursuits  were 
physic  (which  is  also  said  to  have  been  his  profession),  grammar,  and 
philosophy,  in  which  last  he  was  instructed  by  the  Stoic  Dionysius  He- 
racleotes.  Several  poetical  works  on  various  subjects,  as  well  as  a  num 
ber  of  prose  epistles,  are  attributed  to  him,  but  none  of  them  have  come 
down  to  us  except  two  astronomical  poems.  These  have  generally  been 
joined  together  as  if  parts  of  the  same  work,  but  they  seem  to  be  distinct 
poems.  The  first,  called  4>cuj/(fyiej/a,  consists  of  732  verses ;  the  second, 
entitled  Atoo-r/^eTa  (Prognostica),  of  422.  Eudoxus,  of  whom  we  have  al 
ready  made  mention,  about  a  century  earlier,  had  written  two  prose 
works,  ^aiv6^va  and  "Evoirrpov,  which  are  both  lost ;  but  we  are  told  by 
the  biographers  of  Aratus  that  it  was  the  desire  of  Antigonus  to  have 
them  turned  into  verse,  which  gave  rise  to  the  ^aiv^vo.  of  the  latter 
writer  ;  and  it  appears,  from  the  fragments  of  them  preserved  by  Hippar- 
chus,2  that  Aratus  has,  in  fact,  versified,  or  closely  imitated,  parts  of  them 

1  Smith,  T>ict.  Biogr..  s.  v.  2  Petav.  Uranolog.,  p.  173,  seqq.,  ed.  Paris,  1630. 


368  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

both,  but  especially  of  the  first.  The  design  of  the  poem  is  to  give  an 
introduction  to  the  knowledge  of  the  constellations,  with  the  rules  for 
their  risings  and  settings  ;  and  of  the  circles  of  the  sphere,  among  which 
the  Milky  Way  is  reckoned.  The  positions  of  the  constellations  north 
of  the  ecliptic  are  described  by  reference  to  the  principal  groups  sur 
rounding  the  north  pole  (the  Bears,  the  Dragon,  and  Cepheus),  while 
Orion  serves  as  a  point  of  departure  for  those  to  the  south.  The  immo 
bility  of  the  earth,  and  the  revolution  of  the  heavens  about  a  fixed  axis, 
are  maintained  ;  the  path  of  the  sun  in  the  zodiac  is  described,  but  the 
planets  are  introduced  merely  as  bodies  having  a  motion  of  their  own, 
without  any  attempt  to  define  their  periods  ;  nor  is  any  thing  said  about 
the  moon's  orbit.  The  opening  of  the  poem  asserts  the  dependence  of 
all  things  upon  Jove,  and  contains  the  passage  rov  yap  Kal  ytvos  eo-jueV, 
quoted  by  St.  Paul  (Aratus's  fellow-countryman)  in  his  address  to  the 
Athenians.1  From  the  general  want  of  precision  in  the  descriptions,  it 
would  seem  that  Aratus  was  neither  a  mathematician  nor  observer,2  or, 
at  any  rate,  that  in  this  work  he  did  not  aim  at  scientific  accuracy.  He 
not  only  represents  the  configurations  of  particular  groups  incorrectly, 
but  describes  some  phenomena  which  are  inconsistent  with  any  one  sup 
position  as  to  the  latitude  of  the  spectator,  and  others  which  could  not 
coexist  at  any  one  epoch.  These  errors,  however,  are  partly  to  be  at 
tributed  to  Eudoxus  himself,  and  partly  to  the  way  in  which  Aratus  has 
used  the  materials  supplied  by  him 

The  Atoo-7j/xe?a  consists  of  prognostics  of  the  weather  from  astronomic 
al  phenomena,  with  an  account  of  its  effects  upon  animals.  It  appears 
to  be  an  imitation  of  Hesiod,  and  to  have  been  imitated  in  turn  by  Virgil 
in  some  parts  of  the  Georgics.  The  materials  are  said  to  be  taken  al 
most  wholly  from  Aristotle's  Meteorologies  from  the  work  of  Theophras- 
tus  on  the  "  Signs  of  waters,  winds,  and  storms,"  and  from  Hesiod.3 
Nothing  is  said  in  either  poem  of  Astrology,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the 
word. 

The  style  of  these  two  poems  is  distinguished  by  the  elegance  and  ac 
curacy  resulting  from  a  study  of  ancient  models  ;  but  it  wants  originality 
and  poetic  elevation,  and  variety  of  matter  is  excluded  by  the  nature  of 
the  subjects.*  Still,  however,  the  poems  in  question  were  very  popular 
in  both  the  Grecian  and  Roman  world.  As  one  proof  of  the  considera 
tion  which  he  enjoyed,  we  may  cite  the  monument  which  his  fellow-coun 
trymen  erected  to  his  memory,  and  which  became  famous  by  reason  of  a 
physical  phenomenon  which  Mela  mentions  :  "Juxta  inparvo  tumulo  Arati 
poetcB  monumentum  ;  ideo  referendum  quia,  ignotum  quam  ob  causam,  jacta  in 
id  saxa  dissiliant."5  Ovid  also  passes  a  high  eulogium  on  Aratus  :  "  Cum 
sole  et  luna  semper  Aratus  erit  ;"6  but  this  exaggerated  compliment  was 
very  probably  owing  to  the  circumstance  of  no  other  poet  having  taken 
the  astronomic  sphere  for  his  theme  prior  to  Aratus.  Another  proof  of 
the  popularity  of  this  writer  is  afforded  by  the  number  of  commentaries 
and  Latin  translations.  The  Introduction  to  the  •frcu^u.eva,  by  Achilles 


1  Acts,  xvii.,  28.  2  Cic.,  De.  Oral.,  i.,  16.  3  Buhle,  vol.  ii.,  p.  471. 

*  Compare  Quintil,  x.,  1.  5  Mete,  i.,  13.  «  Amor.,  i.,  15. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD. 


369 


Tatius,  the  Commentary  of  Hipparchus,  in  three  books,  and  another,  at 
tributed  by  Petavius  to  Achilles  Tatius,  are  printed  in  the  Uranologium, 
with  a  list  of  other  commentators  (p.  267,  seqq.),  which  includes  the  names 
of  Aristarchus,  Geminus,  and  Erastosthenes.  Parts  of  three  poetical 
translations  are  preserved :  one  written  by  Cicero,  when  very  young ; 
one  by  Caesar  Germanicus,  the  grandson  of  Augustus  ;  and  one  by  Festus 
Avienus. 

The  earliest  edition  of  Aratus  is  that  of  Aldus,  Venice,  1499,  fol.  The  principal  later 
ones  are  that  of  Grotius,  Leyden,  1600,  4to,  headed  "  Syntagma  Arateorum,"  and  con 
taining  the  Greek  text,  the  versions,  and  valuable  notes,  with  copperplates  of  the  con 
stellations,  copied  from  some  old  manuscript ;  that  of  Fell,  Oxford,  1672,  8vo,  styled  by 
Fabricius  "  editio  perquam  nitida  et  castigata,"  containing  also  the  scholia  ;  that  of  Buhle, 
Leipzig,  1793-1801,  2  vols.  8vo,  with  the  three  Latin  versions  mentioned  above;  that  of 
Matthiae,  Frankfort,  1817,  8vo ;  of  Voss,  Heidelberg,  1824,  8vo,  with  a  German  poetical 
version  ;  of  Buttmann,  Berlin,  1826,  8vo  ;  and  of  Bekker,  Berlin,  1828,  8vo.  The  Atocnj- 
faela.,  or  Prognostic^  were  edited  by  Foster,  London,  1813,  8vo. 

2.  NICANDER  (Nt'/ccwSpos),1  a  physician,  poet,  and  grammarian,  of  whose 
life  very  few  particulars  are  found  in  ancient  authors,  and  even  these  few 
are  doubtful  and  contradictory.  It  seems  most  probable,  upon  the  whole, 
that  he  lived  about  B.C.  135,2  in  the  reign  of  Attains  III.,  the  last  king  of 
Pergamus,  to  whom  he  dedicated  one  of  his  poems,  which  is  no  longer 
extant.  His  native  place,  as  he  himself  informs  us,  was  Claros,3  a  city 
of  Ionia,  near  Colophon,  whence  he  is  commonly  called  Colophonius,*  and 
he  succeeded  his  father  as  hereditary  priest  of  Apollo  Clarius.  He  ap 
pears  to  have  been  rather  a  voluminous  writer,  as  the  titles  of  more  than 
twenty  of  his  works  have  been  preserved  ;  but  of  all  these  we  possess  at 
present  only  two  in  a  perfect  state,  with  a  few  fragments  of  some  of  the 
others.  Both  are  poems.  The  longer  one  of  these  poems  is  entitled 
©Tjpia/ca,  and  consists  of  nearly  a  thousand  lines  in  hexameter  verse.  It 
is  dedicated  to  a  person  named  Hermesianax,  who  must  not  be  confound 
ed  with  the  poet  of  that  name.  It  treats  (as  the  name  imports)  of  venom 
ous  animals,  and  the  wounds  inflicted  by  them,  and  contains  some  curi 
ous  and  interesting  zoological  passages,  together  with  numerous  absurd 
fables.  His  other  poem,  called  'AAc^cfy^a/ca,  consists  of  more  than  six 
hundred  lines,  written  in  the  same  measure.  It  is  dedicated  to  a  person 
named  Protagoras,  and  treats  of  poisons  and  their  antidotes. 

Among  the  ancients,  Meander's  authority  in  all  matters  relating  to 
toxicology  seems  to  have  been  considered  high.  Galen  several  times 
quotes  him,  and  Dioscorides,  Aetius,  and  other  medical  authors  have 
made  frequent  use  of  his  works.  Plutarch,  Diphilus,  and  others,  wrote 
commentaries  on  his  Theriaca  ;  Marianus  paraphrased  it  in  iambic  verse ; 
and  Eutecnius  wrote  a  paraphrase  in  prose  of  both  poems,  which  is  still 
extant.  Among  the  moderns,  on  the  other  hand,  Haller  has  passed  a 
very  severe  judgment  on  both  productions.  To  counterbalance,  however, 
in  some  degree,  his  unfavorable  opinion,  it  ought  in  justice  to  be  stated, 
that  the  knowledge  of  natural  history  possessed  by  Nicander  appears  to 
be  at  least  equal  to  that  of  other  writers  of  his  own  or  even  a  later  age. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Compare  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  vol.  iii.,  s.  a. 

3  Theriaca,  in  fine.  *  Cic.,  De  Or  at.,  i.,  16. 


370  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Dr.  Adams,  the  translator  of  Paulus  ^Egineta,  remarks  of  Meander's 
general  treatment  of  cases,  that  it  appears  to  be  founded  on  very  rational 
principles,  and  that,  in  some  instances,  the  correctness  of  his  physiological 
views  is  such  as  can  not  but  command  our  admiration,  considering  the 
age  in  which  he  lived. 

On  the  subject  of  his  poetical  merits  the  ancient  writers  were  not  well 
agreed  ;  for,  though  a  writer  in  the  Greek  Anthology  compliments  Colo 
phon  on  having  been  the  birth-place  of  Homer  and  Nicander,1  and  although 
Cicero  praises  the  poetical  manner  in  which,  in  his  "  Georgics,"  he  treated 
a  subject  of  which  he  was  wholly  ignorant,2  Plutarch,  on  the  other  hand,3 
says  that  the  Theriaca.,  like  the  poems  of  Empedocles,  Parmenides,  and 
Theognis,  have  nothing  in  them  of  poetry  but  the  metre.  Modern  critics 
have  differed  equally  on  this  point ;  but,  practically,  the  judgment  of  pos 
terity  has  been  pronounced  with  sufficient  clearness,  and  his  works  are 
now  scarcely  ever  read  as  poems,  but  merely  consulted  by  those  who  are 
interested  in  points  of  zoological  and  medical  antiquities.  In  reference 
to  his  style  and  language,  Bentley  calls  him,  with  great  truth,  "  antiqua- 
rium,  obsolcta  et  casca  verba  studiose  venantem,  et  vel  sui  sceculi  lectoribus 
difficilem  et  obscurum."* 

A  list  of  Nicander's  lost  works  is  given  by  Fabricius.  Among  them 
we  may  mention,  1.  rewpyf/ca,  a  poem  in  hexameter  verse  on  husbandry, 
consisting  of  at  least  two  books,  of  which  some  long  fragments  remain. 
2.  'Erepoiov/jieva,  a  poem  in  hexameter  verse,  in  five  books,  mentioned  by 
Suidas,  and  quoted  by  Athenaeus,  Antoninus  Liberalis,  and  other  writers. 
It  was  perhaps  in  reference  to  this  work  that  Didymus  applied  to  Nican 
der  the  epithet  of  "fabulosus."  3.  ®-r)fiaii«i,  in  at  least  three  books,  men 
tioned  by  the  scholiast  on  the  Theriaca.  4.  Tlfpl  TTOIVIT$>V,  probably  the 
work  in  which  Nicander  tried  to  prove  that  Homer  was  a  native  of  Colo 
phon.  5.  The  TlpoyvwariKa  of  Hippocrates,  paraphrased  in  hexameter 
verse.  6.  Si/ceA/a,  of  which  the  tenth  book  is  quoted  by  Stephanus  Byzan- 
tinus. 

Nicander's  poems  have  generally  been  published  together,  but  sometimes  separately. 
They  were  first  published  in  Greek  at  the  end  of  Dioscorides,  Venice,  1499,  fol.,  by  Aldus, 
and  by  the  same  in  a  separate  form,  Venice,  1523,  4to.  The  Greek  paraphrase  of  both 
poems,  by  Eutecnius,  first  appeared  in  Bandini's  edition,  Florence,  1764,  8vo.  The  most 
complete  and  valuable  edition  that  has  hitherto  appeared  is  Schneider's,  who  published 
the  Alexipharmaca  in  1792,  Halle,  8vo,  and  the  Theriaca  in  1816,  Leipzig,  8vo ;  contain 
ing  a  Latin  translation,  the  scholia,  the  paraphrase  by  Eutecnius,  the  editor's  annota 
tions,  and  the  fragments  of  Nicander's  lost  works.  The  latest  edition  is  that  of  Lehrs, 
in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  Paris,  1846,  printed  along  with  Oppian  and  others,  and  con 
taining  the  Greek  text,  a  Latin  version,  and  the  fragments.  The  text  is  emended  from 
the  "  euros posteriores"  of  Schneider,  and  the  conjectures  of  Lobeck,  Meineke,  and  Naeke. 
The  Theriaca  were  published  in  the  Cambridge  "  Museum  Criticum"  (vol.  i.,p.  370,  seqq.), 
with  Bentley's  emendations,  copied  from  the  margin  of  a  copy  of  Gorra;us's  edition, 
which  once  (apparently)  belonged  to  Dr.  Mead,  and  is  now  preserved  in  the  British  Mu 
seum.  The  scholia  on  Nicander  have  been  published  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graeca,  along 
with  those  on  Theocritus  and  Oppian,  under  the  supervision  of  DUbner  and  Bussemaker. 

i  Anthol.  Grose.,  ix.,  213.  2  Cic.,  De  Orat.,  i.,  16. 

3  De  and.  poet.,  c.  2,  vol.  i.,  p.  36,  ed.  Tauchn. 
*  Cambridge  Museum  Criticum,  vol.  i.,  p.  371. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  371 

They  have  been  carefully  collated  with  the  MSS.  in  the  "  Bibliotheque  Natiouale,"  and 
some  portions  have  been  hitherto  unedited. 

DIDACTIC     POETS     NOT     EPIC. 

The  didactic  poets  of  the  period  under  review  did  not  always  confine 
themselves  to  hexameter  versification,  but  employed  likewise  other  meas 
ures.  The  iambic  trimeter,  for  instance,  was  adopted  by  two  who  remain 
to  be  noticed  by  us,  namely,  Apollodorus  and  Scymnus. 

I.  APOLLODORUS  ('ATroAA^Sojpos),1  a  grammarian  of  Athens,  was  a  pupil 
of  Aristarchus,  and  flourished  about  B.C.  140,  a  few  years  after  the  fall 
of  Corinth.     Farther  particulars  are  not  mentioned  respecting  him.     He 
is  best  known  by  his  prose  work  entitled  BiftXioO-fjKr),  and  he  will,  therefore, 
more  properly  be  noticed  by  us  among  the  prose  wrriters  of  this  period. 
At  present  we  will  merely  consider  some  of  his  poetical  productions. 
Among  his  other  works,  Apollodorus  wrote,  1.  Trjs  TrepioSos,  KUfuicf  /ue- 
rpcf,  that  is,  a  Universal  Geography,  in  iambic  verse  (trimeters),  such 
as  was  afterward  written  by  Scymnus  of  Chios,  and  by  Dionysius.     2. 
XpoviKa,  or  XpoviK^  <rtWo£is,  a  Chronicle,  in  iambic  trimeters,  comprising 
the  history  of  1040  years,  from  the  destruction  of  Troy  (B.C.  1184)  down 
to  his  own  time,  B.C.  143.     This  work  was  a  sort  of  continuation  of  the 
Bibliotheca.     Of  how  many  books  it  consisted  is  not  quite  certain.     In 
Stephanus  Byzantinus  the  fourth  book  is  mentioned ;  but  if  Syncellus 
refers  to  this  work,  it  must  have  consisted  of  at  least  eight  books.     The 
loss  of  this  work  is  one  of  the  severest  that  we  have  to  lament  in  the 
historical  literature  of  antiquity. 

II.  SCYMNUS  (2/cjfywos),2  of  Chios,  wrote  a  Periegesis,  or  description  of 
the  earth,  which  is  referred  to  in  a  few  passages  of  Stephanus  Byzanti 
nus,3  and  other  later  writers.    A  brief  Periegesis,  written  in  iambic  metre, 
and  consisting  of  nearly  1000  lines,  has  come  down  to  us  under  his  name. 
This  poem,  as  appears  from  the  author's  own  statement,  was  written  in 
imitation  of  the  similar  work  in  iambic  verse,  composed  by  the  Athenian 
Apollodorus,  and  already  alluded  to.     It  is  dedicated  to  King  Nicomedes, 
whom  some  modern  writers  suppose  to  be  the  same  as  Nicomedes  III,, 
king  of  Bithynia,  who  died  B.C.  74  ;  but  this  is  quite  uncertain.     A  por 
tion  of  this  poem  was  first  published  by  Hoeschel,  under  the  name  of 
Marcianus  Heracleotes,  along  with  other  Greek  geographers,  Augsburg, 
1600, 8vo  ;  and  again  by  Morell,  also  under  the  name  of  Marcianus,  Paris, 
1606,  8vo.     But  Lucas  Holstenius  and  Is.  Vossius  maintained  that  the 
poem  in  question  was  written  by  Scymnus  of  Chios,  and  is  the  work  re 
ferred  to  in  the  passages  of  the  ancient  writers  mentioned  above.     Their 
opinion  was  adopted  by  Dodwell,  and  the  poem  was  accordingly  printed 
under  the  name  of  Scymnus  by  Hudson  and  by  Gail,  in  the  Geographi 
Graci  Minor  es,  as  well  as  by  B.  Fabricius,  in  his  recent  edition  of  the 
work,  Leipzig,  1846.     Meineke,  however,  maintains,  and,  in  the  opinion 
of  some,  has  proved,  in  his  edition  of  the  poem,  published  shortly  after 
that  of  Fabricius  (Berlin,  1846),  that  the  Periegesis  of  Scymnus  of  Chios, 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib. 

-1   Str.ph.  By?.,  s.  v.  ITcfpo;.  'E,pfj.<t>va.io 


372  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

quoted  by  the  ancient  writers,  was  written  in  prose,  and  was  an  entirely 
different  work  from  the  extant  poem,  the  author  of  which  is  quite  un 
known,  according  to  him.  The  best  edition  is  Meineke's,  just  mentioned. 

II.     LYRIC     POETRY. 

I.  Of  the  different  kinds  of  Lyric  Poetry,  considered  in  its  most  general 
acceptation,  the  writers  of  the  Alexandrine  Age  especially  cultivated 
Elegiac  composition.     Of  Melic  poetry,  strictly  so  termed,  but  few  traces 
present  themselves  to  our  notice. 

II.  The  elegiac  writers  of  this  period  most  deserving  of  notice  are  Phi 
letas,  Hermesianax,  Phanocles,  and  Callimachus. 

1.  PHILETAS  (^t^ras),  a  native  of  Cos,  was  a  distinguished  poet  and 
grammarian,1  and  flourished  during  the  earlier  years  of  the  Alexandrine 
school,  at  the  period  when  the  earnest  study  of  the  classical  literature  of 
Greece  was  still  combined,  in  many  scholars,  with  considerable  power 
of  original  composition.  The  chief  period  of  his  literary  activity  was 
during  the  reign  of  the  first  Ptolemy,  who  appointed  him  tutor  to  his  son 
Ptolemy  II.  Philadelphus.  Clinton  calculates  that  his  death  may  be  placed 
about  B.C.  290,2  but  he  may  possibly  have  lived  some  years  longer,  as  he 
is  said  to  have  been  contemporary  with  Aratus,  who  flourished  B.C.  270. 
He  was  the  instructor,  if  not  formally,  at  least  by  his  example  and  influ 
ence,  of  Theocritus  and  Zenodotus  of  Ephesus.  Theocritus  expressly 
mentions  him  as  the  model  which  he  strove  to  imitate.3  Philetas  seems 
to  have  been  naturally  of  a  very  weak  constitution,  which  at  last  broke 
down  under  excessive  study.  He  was  so  remarkably  thin  as  to  become 
an  object  for  the  ridicule  of  the  comic  poets,  who  represented  him  as 
wearing  leaden  soles  to  his  shoes,  to  prevent  his  being  blown  away  by  a 
strong  wind ;  a  joke  which  ^Elian  takes  literally,  sagely  questioning, 
however,  if  he  was  too  weak  to  stand  against  the  wind,  how  he  could  be 
strong  enough  to  carry  his  leaden  shoes.4  We  learn  from  Hermesianax 
that  a  bronze  statue  was  erected  to  his  memory  by  the  inhabitants  of  his 
native  island,  his  attachment  to  which  during  his  lifetime  he  had  expressed 
in  his  poems. 

The  poetry  of  Philetas  was  chiefly  elegiac.5  Of  all  the  writers  in  that 
department,  he  was  esteemed  the  best  after  Callimachus,  to  whom  a 
taste  less  pedantic  than  that  of  the  Alexandrean  critics  would  probably 
have  preferred  him,  for,  to  judge  by  his  fragments,  he  escaped  the  snare 
of  cumbrous,  learned  affectation.6  These  two  poets  formed  the  chief 
models  for  the  Roman  elegy ;  nay,  Propertius  expressly  states  in  one 
passage  that  he  imitated  Philetas  in  preference  to  Callimachus.7  The 
elegies  of  Philetas  were  chiefly  erotic,  and  many  of  them  were  devoted 
to  the  praises  of  a  female  named  Bittis,  or,  as  the  Latin  poets  give  it, 
Battis.8  It  seems  very  probable  that  he  wrote  a  collection  of  poems  spe 
cially  in  praise  of  Bittis,  and  that  this  was  the  collection  which  was  known 

1  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  C57.  2  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  vol.  iii.,  App.  12,  No.  16. 

3  Theocrit.,  Id.,  vii.,  39 ;  Schol.  ad  loc.  *  Mlian,  V.  H.,  ix.,  14  ;  x.,  6. 

»  Suid.,  s.v.        •  «  Quintil,  x.,  1,  58.  1  Propert.,  ii.,  34,  31 ;  iii.,  1, 1 ;  iv.,  6,  2. 

a  Ovid,  Trust.,  i.,  6, 1 ,  ex  Ponto,  iii.,  1,  57. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  373 

and  is  quoted  by  Stobaeus  under  the  name  of  Ualyvia.1  There  are  also 
two  other  poems  of  Philetas  quoted  by  Stobaeus,  the  subjects  of  which 
were  evidently  mythological,  as  we  see  from  their  titles,  ATJ^TTJP  and 
'EP/J.TJS.  From  the  fragments  that  remain  of  the  former,  it  appears  to 
have  been  in  elegiac  metre,  and  its  subject  to  have  been  the  lamentation 
of  Ceres  for  the  loss  of  her  daughter.  The  latter  poem  Meineke  sug 
gests  may  have  been  in  hexameters.  Besides  his  poems,  Philetas  wrote 
in  prose  on  grammar  and  criticism.  He  was  one  of  the  commentators 
on  Homer,  whom  he  seems  to  have  dealt  with  very  freely,  both  critically 
and  exegetically ;  and  in  this  course  he  was  followed  by  his  pupil  Zeno- 
dotus.  Aristarchus  wrote  a  work  in  opposition  to  Philetas.2  But  his 
most  important  grammatical  work  was  that  which  Athenseus  repeatedly 
quotes  under  the  title  of  "AraKra.  Nothing  is  left  of  it  except  a  few  scat 
tered  explanations  of  words,  from  which,  however,  it  may  be  inferred 
that  Philetas  made  great  use  of  the  light  thrown  on  the  meaning  of  words 
by  their  dialectic  varieties. 

The  fragments  of  Philetas  have  been  collected  by  Kayser,  Philetas  Coi  Fragmenta,  qu& 
reperiuntur,  Getting.,  1793,  8vo ;  by  Bach,  Philetce  Coi,  Hermesianactis  Colophonii,  atque 
Phanoclis  Reliquiae,  Halle,  1829,  8vo  ;  and  in  the  editions  of  the  Greek  Anthology  (Brunck, 
Anal.,\ol.  i.,  p.  189;  ii.,p.523;  iii.,p.234;  Jacobs'  Anth.  Grac.,  vol.  i.,  p.  121,  seqq.).  The 
most  important  fragments  are  also  contained  in  Schneidewin's  Delectus  Poes.  Grose., 
vol.  i.,  p.  142,  seqq. 

HERMESIANAX  ('Epfj.Tjffidua^)s  of  Colophon,  a  distinguished  elegiac  poet, 
the  friend  and  disciple  of  Philetas,  lived  in  the  time  of  Philip  and  Alex 
ander  the  Great,  and  seems  to  have  died  before  the  destruction  of  Colo 
phon  by  Lysimachus,  B.C.  302. 4  His  chief  work  was  an  elegiac  poem, 
in  three  books,  addressed  to  a  female,  whose  name,  Leontium  (^6vnov\ 
formed  the  title  of  the  poem,  like  the  Cynthia  of  Propertius.  A  great 
part  of  the  third  book  is  quoted  by  Athenaeus.5  The  poem  is  also  cited 
by  Pausanias,6  by  Parthenius,7  and  by  Antoninus  Liberalis.8  We  learn 
from  another  quotation  in  Pausanias  that  Hermesianax  wrote  an  elegy 
on  the  centaur  Eurytion.9  It  is  somewhat  doubtful  whether  the  Herme 
sianax  who  is  mentioned  by  the  scholiast  on  Nicander,  and  who  wrote  a 
poem  called  Hepo-iicd,  was  the  same  or  a  younger  poet. 

The  fragment  of  Hermesianax  has  been  edited  separately  by  Ruhnken  (Append,  ad 
Epist.  Crit.,  ii.,  p.  283,  Opusc.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  615)  ;  by  Weston,  London,  1784,  8vo ;  by  Ilgen 
(Opusc.  Var.Philol.,\ol.  i.,  p.  247,  Erfurdt,  1797,  8vo) ;  by  Rigler  and  Axt,  Cologne,  1828, 
16mo ;  by  Hermann  (Opusc.  Acad.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  239) ;  by  Bach  (Philet.  Hermes,  et  Phanoc. 
Reliq.,  Halle,  1829,  8vo) ;  by  Bailey,  with  a  critical  epistle  by  Burges,  London,  1839, 
8vo;  and  by  Schneidewin  (Delect.  Poes.  Eleg.,  p.  147).  Compare,  also,  Bergk,  De  Her- 
mesianactis  Elegia,  Marburg,  1845. 

PHANOCLES  (*o»/o/c\^s),  one  of  the  best  of  the  later  elegiac  poets,  proba 
bly  lived  in  the  time  of  Philip  and  Alexander  the  Great.  He  seems  to 
have  written  only  one  poem,  entitled  "Epcores  T)  Ka\oi.l°  We  still  possess 
a  considerable  fragment  from  the  opening  of  it,  which  is  esteemed  by 

1  Jacobs,  ad  Anthol.  Grose.,  vol.  i.,  pt.  i.,  p.  388,  seqq.  2  Schol.  Venet.  ad  II.,  ii.,  111. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Pausan.,  i.,  9,  8.  5  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  597. 

e  Parian.,  vii.,  17,  5  ;  viii.,  12, 1.         ?  Erot.,  5,  22.  8  Metam.,  39. 

9  Pausan.,  vii.,  18, 1.  10  Clem.  Alex.,  Strom.,  vi.,  p.  750. 


374  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Ruhnken  and  other  critics  as  one  of  the  most  perfect  and  beautiful  speci 
mens  of  elegiac  poetry  which  have  come  down  to  us,  and  as  superior  even 
to  Hermesianax  in  the  simple  beauty  of  the  language  and  the  smoothness 
of  the  verse. 

The  fragments  of  Phanocles  have  been  edited  by  Ruhnken  (Epist.  Crit.,  ii.,  Opusc., 
vol.  ii.,  p.  630)  ;  by  Bach  (Philetae,  Hermesianactis,  atque  Phanoclis  Reliquiae,)  ;  and  by 
Schneidewin  (Delect.  Foes.  Graec.,  p.  158).  The  large  fragment  and  another  distich  are 
contained  in  the  Greek  Anthology. 


CALLIMACHUS  (KaAAi/xaxos),1  a  native  of  Gyrene,  one  of  the  most  cele 
brated  Alexandrine  grammarians  and  poets,  was,  according  to  Suidas, 
a  son  of  Battus  and  Mesatme,  and  belonged  to  the  celebrated  family  of 
the  Battiada,  whence  Ovid  and  others  call  him  simply  Battiades.  He  was 
a  disciple  of  the  grammarian  Hermocrates,  and  afterward  taught  at  Eleu- 
sis,  a  suburb  of  Alexandrea.  He  was  highly  esteemed  by  Ptolemy  Phil- 
adelphus,  who  invited  him  to  a  place  in  the  Museum.2  Callimachus  was 
still  alive  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Euergetes,  the  successor  of  Philadel- 
phus.3  It  was  formerly  believed,  but  is  now  established  as  an  historical 
fact,  that  Callimachus  was  chief  librarian  of  the  famous  library  at  Alex 
andrea.  This  fact  leads  us  to  the  conclusion  that  he  was  the  successor 
of  Zenodotus,  and  that  he  held  this  office  from  about  B.C.  260  until  his 
death,  about  B.C.  240.*  This  calculation  agrees  with  the  statement  of 
Aulus  Gellius,5  that  Callimachus  lived  shortly  before  the  first  Punic  war. 
He  was  married  to  a  daughter  of  Euphrates  of  Syracuse,  and  had  a  sister 
Megatime,  who  was  married  to  Stasenorus,  and  had  a  son  Callimachus, 
who  is  distinguished  from  his  uncle  by  being  called  the  younger,  and  is 
said  by  Suidas  to  have  been  the  author  of  an  epic  poem,  riepl  vfjffav. 

Callimachus  was  one  of  the  most  distinguished  grammarians,  critics, 
and  poets  of  the  Alexandrine  period,  and  his  celebrity  surpassed  that  of 
nearly  all  the  other  Alexandrine  scholars  and  poets.  Several  of  the  most 
distinguished  men  of  that  period,  such  as  his  successor  Eratosthenes, 
Philostephanus,  Aristophanes  of  Byzantium,  Apollonius  Rhodius,  Ister, 
and  Hermippus,  were  among  his  pupils.  Callimachus  was  one  of  the 
most  fertile  writers  of  antiquity  ;  and,  if  the  number  in  Suidas  be  correct, 
he  wrote  800  works,  though  we  may  take  it  for  granted  that  most  of  them 
were  not  of  great  extent,  if  he  followed  his  own  maxim,  that  a  great 
book  was  a  great  evil.6  The  number  of  his  works  of  which  the  titles  or 
fragments  are  known  to  us  amounts  to  upward  of  forty.  But  what  we 
possess  is  very  little,  and  consists  principally  of  poetical  productions,  ap 
parently  the  least  valuable  of  all  his  works,  since  Callimachus,  notwith 
standing  the  reputation  he  enjoyed  for  his  poems,  was  not  a  man  of  real 
poetical  talent  :  labor  and  learning  are  with  him  the  substitutes  for  poet 
ical  genius  and  talent.  His  prose  works,  on  the  other  hand,  which  would 
have  furnished  us  with  some  highly  important  information  concerning 
ancient  mythology,  history,  literature,  &c.,  are  completely  lost. 

The  poetical  productions  of  Callimachus  still  extant,  either  in  whole  or 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Swd.,  s.  v.  ;  Strab.,  xvii.,  p.  838. 

3  Schol.  ad  Callim.,  Hymn.,  ii..  26.  *  Ritschl,  Die  Alexandria  Biblioth.,  p.  19,  84. 

«  Aul  GelL,  xvii.,  21.  «  Athen.,  Hi.,  p.  72. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  375 

in  part,  are  :  1.  Hymns,  six  in  number,  of  which  five  are  written  in  hex 
ameter  verse,  and  in  the  Ionic  dialect,  and  one  on  the  bath  of  Pallas,  in 
distichs,  and  in  the  Doric  dialect.  These  hymns,  which  bear  greater  re 
semblance  to  epic  than  to  lyric  poetry,  are  the  productions  of  labor  and 
learning,  like  most  of  the  poems  of  this  period.  Almost  every  line  fur 
nishes  some  curious  mythical  information,  and  it  is,  perhaps,  not  saying 
too  much  to  assert,  that  these  hymns  are  more  overloaded  with  learning 
than  any  other  poetical  productions  of  that  time.  Their  style  has  nothing 
of  the  easy  flow  of  genuine  poetry,  and  is  evidently  studied  and  labored. 
There  are  some  ancient  Greek  scholia  on  these  hymns,  which,  however, 
have  no  great  merit.  2.  Seventy-three  epigrams,  which  belong  to  the 
best  specimens  of  this  kind  of  poetry.  The  high  estimation  they  enjoyed 
in  antiquity  is  attested  by  the  fact  that  Archibius  the  grammarian,  who 
lived,  at  the  latest,  one  generation  after  Callimachus,  wrote  a  comment 
ary  upon  them,  and  that  Marianus,  in  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Anasta- 
sius,  wrote  a  paraphrase  of  them  in  iambics.  They  were  incorporated  in 
the  Greek  Anthology  at  an  early  period,  and  have  thus  been  preserved. 
3.  Elegies.  These  are  lost,  with  the  exception  of  some  fragments ;  but 
there  are  imitations  of  them  by  the  Roman  poets,  the  most  celebrated  of 
which  is  the  "  De  Coma  Berenices"  of  Catullus.  If  we  may  believe  the 
Roman  critics,  Callimachus  was  the  greatest  among  the  elegiac  poets,1 
and  Ovid,  Propertius,  and  Catullus  took  him  for  their  model  in  this  species 
of  poetry.  4.  Fragments  of  other  poetical  wrorks,  among  which  we  may 
mention,  1.  The  Afria,  an  epic  poem  in  four  books,  on  the  causes  of  the 
various  mythical  stories,  religious  ceremonies,  and  other  customs.  This 
work  is  often  referred  to,  and  was  paraphrased  by  Marianus ;  but  the 
paraphrase  is  lost,  and  of  the  original  we  have  only  a  few  fragments. 
2.  An  epic  poem,  entitled  'EKCIATJ,  which  was  the  name  of  an  old  woman 
who  had  received  Theseus  hospitably  when  he  went  out  to  fight  against 
the  Marathonian  bull.  This  work  was  likewise  paraphrased  by  Marianus, 
and  we  still  possess  some  fragments  of  the  original. 

.It  appears  that  there  was  scarcely  any  kind  of  poetry  in  which  Ualli- 
machus  did  not  try  his  strength,  for  he  is  said  to  have  written  comedies, 
tragedies,  iambic  and  choliambic  poems.  An  account  of  his  poem  Ibis 
has  been  given  in  the  sketch  of  Apollonius  Rhodius. 

Of  his  numerous  prose  works  not  one  is  extant  entire,  though  there 
were  among  them  some  of  the  highest  importance.  The  one  of  which 
the  loss  is  most  to  be  lamented  was  entitled  riiVa£  iravToSair£>j/  cruyypa^ua- 
TUV,  or  TrivaKcs  TUIV  tv  Trdarj  TraiSeia  SiaAajiuJ/aj/Twj/,  Kal  wv  avvsypa.'fyav,  in  120 
books.  This  work  was  the  first  comprehensive  history  of  Greek  litera 
ture.  It  contained,  systematically  arranged,  lists  of  the  authors  and  their 
works.  The  various  departments  of  literature  appear  to  have  been  classi 
fied,  so  that  Callimachus  spoke  of  the  comic  and  tragic  poets,  of  the  ora 
tors,  lawgivers,  philosophers,  &c.,  in  separate  books,  in  which  the  authors 
were  enumerated  in  their  chronological  succession.  It  is  natural  to  sup 
pose  that  this  work  was  the  fruit  of  his  studies  in  the  libraries  of  Alex- 
andrea,  and  that  it  mainly  recorded  such  authors  as  were  contained  in 

'   Quinlil.  x,,  I,  58. 


376  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

those  collections.  His  pupil,  Aristophanes  of  Byzantium,  wrote  a  com 
mentary  upon  it.  Among  his  other  prose  works  was  one  entitled  MOVO-- 
€?oj/,  which  is  usually  supposed  to  have  treated  of  the  Museum  of  Alex- 
andrea  and  the  scholars  connected  with  it. 

The  first  edition  of  the  six  hymns  of  Callimachus  appeared  at  Florence  in  4to,  proba 
bly  between  1494  and  1500.  It  was  followed  by  the  Aldine,  Venice,  1513,  8vo  ;  but  a  bet 
ter  edition,  in  which  some  gaps  are  filled  up,  and  the  Greek  scholia  are  added,  is  that  of 
Gelenius,  Basle,  1532,  4to,  reprinted  at  Paris,  1549,  4to.  A  more  complete  edition  than 
any  of  the  preceding  ones  is  that  of  H.  Stephens,  Paris,  1566,  fol.,  in  the  collection  of 
"  Poetce  Prindpes  Heroici  Carminis."  This  edition  is  the  basis  of  the  text  which  from 
that  time  has  been  regarded  as  the  vulgate.  A  second  edition  by  H.  Stephens,  Geneva, 
1577,  4to,  is  a  great  improvement  on  the  previous  one.  It  contains  the  Greek  scholia,  a 
Latin  translation,  thirty-three  epigrams  of  Callimachus,  and  a  few  fragments  of  his  other 
works.  Henceforth  scarcely  any  thing  was  done  for  the  text,  until  Th.  Graevius  under 
took  a  new  and  comprehensive  edition,  which  was  completed  by  his  father,  J.  G.  Graevius. 
It  appeared  at  Utrecht,  1697,  2  vols.  8vo.  It  contains  the  notes  of  the  previous  editors, 
of  Bentley,  and  the  famous  commentary  of  Spanheim.  This  edition  is  the  basis  of  the 
one  edited  by  Ernesti,  Leyden,  1761,  2  vols.  8vo,  which  contains  the  whole  of  the  com 
mentary  of  Graevius's  edition,  a  much  improved  text,  a  more  complete  collection  of  the 
fragments,  and  additional  notes  by  Hemsterhuis  and  Ruhnken.  Still,  Ernesti  did  not 
completely  satisfy  the  wishes  of  the  learned  in  the  use  which  he  made  of  the  last-men 
tioned  subsidia.  Among  subsequent  editions  we  need  only  mention  those  of  Loesner, 
Leipzig,  1774,  8vo ;  ofVolger,  Leipzig,  1817,  8vo  ;  of  Schaefer,  Leipzig,  1817,  8vo ;  and 
of  Blomfield,  London,  1815,  8vo.  The  fragments  of  the  Elegies,  with  the  notes  of 
Valckenaer,  were  given  by  Luzac,  Leyden,  1798,  8vo  ;  an  edition  of  the  Fragments  gen 
erally  was  given  by  Naeke  (Opusc.  Philol.,  ed.  Welcker,  vol.  ii.),  Bonn,  1844,  large  8vo. 

MELIC     POETRY. 

I.  With  the  exception  of  the  Scolia,  or  convivial  songs,  to  which  we 
have  already  alluded,  the  melic  productions  of  this  period  wrere  com 
paratively  few  in  number.     The  writer  most  deserving  of  mention  under 
this  head  is  MEI,INNO  (MeAtjW?),  a  lyric  poetess,  author  of  an  ode  on  Rome 
(fls  'Pa>/j.r)v),  in  five  Sapphic  stanzas,  which  is  commonly  ascribed  to  Erin- 
na  of  Lesbos,  as  an  ode  on  valor  (eis  ^cfytTjy).    Nothing  is  known  of  Melin- 
no  with  certainty,  except  what  the  ode  itself  shows,  namely,  that  she 
lived  in  the  flourishing  period  of  the  Roman  empire.    The  ode  is  printed, 
with  an  admirable  essay  upon  it,  by  Welcker,  in  Creuzer's  Meletemata, 
1817,  p.  1,  and  in  Welcker's  Kleine  Schriften,  vol.  ii.,  p.  160,  seqq. 

II.  Some  of  the  melic  poets  of  this  period  occasionally  indulged  in  a 
singular  species  of  trifling.    They  composed,  namely,  short  poems  of  that 
fantastic  species  called  griphi  (ypfyoi),  or  carmina  figurata ;  that  is,  pieces 
in  which  the  lines  are  so  arranged  as  to  make  the  whole  poem  resemble 
the  form  of  some  object.     SIMMIAS  of  Rhodes,1  who  flourished  under  the 
early  Ptolemies,  was  one  of  these  writers,  and  three  short  poems  of  his, 
constructed  in  this  way,  have  come  down  to  us,  along  with  six  epigrams, 
in  the  Greek  Anthology.     The  first  of  these  poems  is  called,  from  its 
form,  the  Wings  (irrepvyes) ;  the  second,  the  Egg  (<u6v) ;  the  third,  the 
Hatchet  (7re\e/cus).    There  are  several  other  poems  of  the  same  species  in 
the  Anthology,  such  as  the  Pan-pipes  (a-vpiy^)  of  Theocritus,  the  Altar 

of  Dosiadas,  and  the  Egg  and  Hatchet  of  Besantinus. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  377 


III.     BUCOLIC     POETRY. 


I.  Bucolic  Poetry  (rot,  /3ou/coAt/ca  Troi^aro),  called  also  Pastoral,  is  a  spe 
cies  of  poetic  composition,  the  interlocutors  in  which  are  herdsmen, 
shepherds,  &c.,  and  the  scenes  portrayed  are  drawn  from  rural  life. 
Theocritus  was  the  creator  of  bucolic  poetry  as  &  branch  of  Greek,  and, 
through  imitators,  such  as  Virgil,  of  Roman  literature.     The  germ  of 
this  species  of  poetry  may  be  discovered,  at  a  very  early  period,  among 
the  Dorians  both  of  Laconia  and  Sicily,  especially  at  Tyndaris  and  Syra 
cuse  in  the  latter,  when  the  festivals  of  Diana  were  enlivened  with  songs, 
in  which  two  shepherds  or  herdsmen,  or  two  parties  of  them,  contended 
with  one  another,  and  which  gradually  grew  into  an  art,  practiced  by  a 
class  of  performers  called  Lydiastce  and  Bucolista,  who  flourished  extens 
ively  in  Sicily  and  the  neighboring  districts  of  Italy. 

II.  The  subjects  of  the  songs  sung  by  this  class  of  performers  were 
popular  mythical  stories,  and  the  scenes  of  country  life  ;  the  beauty,  love, 
and  unhappy  end  of  Daphnis,  the  ideal  of  the  shepherd,  who  was  intro 
duced  by  Stesichorus  into  his  poetry,  and  of  Diomus,  who  was  named  by 
Epicharmus  ;  the  melancholy  complaints  of  the  coy  huntsman  Menalcas, 
and  other  kindred  subjects.     These  songs  were  still  popular  in  the  time 
of  Diodorus.    Theocritus,  however,  was  the  first  who  reduced  this  species 
of  poetry  to  such  a  form  as  to  constitute  it  a  branch  of  regular  literature  ; 
and,  in  so  doing,  he  followed  not  merely  the  impulse  of  his  own  genius, 
but,  to  a  great  extent,  the  examples  of  Epicharmus  and  of  Sophron,  es 
pecially  the  latter.1 

III.  The  bucolic  poets  that  will  here  require  our  attention  are  three  in 
number  ;  namely,  Theocritus,  Bion,  and  Moschus. 

1.  THEOCRITUS  (0e<kpn-os),2  the  celebrated  bucolic  poet,  was  a  native 
of  Syracuse,  and  the  son  of  Praxagoras  and  Philinna.  He  visited  Alex- 
andrea  during  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Soter,  where  he  re 
ceived  the  instruction  of  Philetas  and  Asclepiades,  and  began  to  distin 
guish  himself  as  a  poet.  His  first  efforts  obtained  for  him  the  patronage 
of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  who  was  associated  in  the  kingdom  with  his 
father,  Ptolemy  Soter,  in  B.C.  285,  and  in  whose  praise,  therefore,  the 
poet  wrote  the  fourteenth,  fifteenth,  and  seventeenth  idylls.  At  Alexan- 
drea  he  became  acquainted  with  the  poet  Aratus,  to  whom  he  addressed 
his  sixth  idyll.  Theocritus  afterward  returned  to  Syracuse,  and  lived 
there  under  Hiero  II.  It  appears  from  the  sixteenth  idyll  that  Theocri 
tus  was  dissatisfied  both  with  the  want  of  liberality  on  the  part  of  Hiero 
in  rewarding  him  for  his  poems,  and  with  the  political  state  of  his  native 
country.  It  may,  therefore,  be  supposed  that  he  devoted  the  latter  part 
of  his  life  almost  entirely  to  the  contemplation  of  those  scenes  of  nature 
and  of  country  life,  on  his  representation  of  which  his  fame  chiefly  rests. 

Theocritus,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  was  the  creator  of  bucolic 
poetry,  and  was  influenced,  to  a  great  extent,  by  the  examples  of  Epi 
charmus  and  Sophron.  His  bucolic  idylls  are  of  an  essentially  dramatic 

1  Welcker,  uber  den  Ursprung  des  Hirtenlieds,  Klcine  Schnften,  vol.  i.,  p.  402,  seqq. 

2  Smith,  Diet,  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


378  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

and  mimetic  character.  They  are  pictures  of  the  ordinary  life  of  the 
common  people  of  Sicily,  whence  their  name,  eJfS??,  eiSuAAta.  The  pastor 
al  poems  and  romances  of  later  times  are  a  totally  different  sort  of  com 
position  from  the  bucolics  of  Theocritus,  who  knows  nothing  of  the  af 
fected  refinement,  the  pure  innocence,  the  primeval  simplicity,  or  even 
the  worship  of  nature,  which  have  been  ascribed  to  the  imaginary  shep 
herds  of  a  fictitious  Arcadia ;  nothing  of  the  distinction  between  the 
country  and  the  town,  the  description  of  which  has  been  made  a  vehicle 
of  bitter  satire  upon  the  vices  of  civilized  communities.  He  merely  ex 
hibits  simple  and  faithful  pictures  of  the  common  life  of  the  Sicilian  peo 
ple,  in  a  thoroughly  objective,  although  truly  poetical  spirit.  He  abstains 
from  all  the  mere  artifices  of  composition,  such  as  fine  imagery,  high  col 
oring,  and  pathetic  sentiment.  He  deals  but  sparingly  in  descriptions, 
which  he  introduces  only  as  episodes,  and  never  attempts  any  of  those 
allegorical  applications  of  the  sentiments  and  adventures  of  shepherds 
which  have  made  the  bucolics  of  Virgil  a  signal  failure.  Dramatic  sim 
plicity  and  truth  are  impressed  upon  the  pictures  exhibited  in  his  poems, 
into  the  coloring  of  which  he  has  thrown  much  of  the  natural  comedy 
which  is  always  seen  in  the  common  life  of  a  free  people.  His  fifteenth 
idyll,  the  Adoniazusa,  is  a  master-piece  of  the  mimetic  exhibition  of  fe 
male  character,  rendered  the  more  admirable  by  the  skill  with  which  he 
has  introduced  the  praises  of  Arsinoe  and  Berenice,  without  sacrificing 
any  thing  of  its  genuine  dramatic  spirit.  The  form  of  these  poems  is  in 
perfect  keeping  with  their  object.  The  symmetrical  arrangement  and 
the  rapid  transitions  of  the  lively  dialogue,  the  varied  language  and  the 
sweetly  musical  rhythms,  the  combination  of  the  prevailing  epic  verse 
and  diction  with  the  forms  of  common  speech,  all  contribute  much  to  the 
general  effect.  In  short,  as  Theocritus  was  the  first  who  developed  the 
powers  of  bucolic  poetry,  so  he  may  also  be  said  to  have  been  the  last 
who  understood  its  true  spirit,  its  proper  objects,  and  its  natural  limits. 

The  poems  of  Theocritus,  however,  are  by  no  means  all  bucolic.  The 
collection  which  has  come  down  to  us  under  his  name  consists  of  thirty 
poems,  called  by  the  general  title  of  Idylls,  a  fragment  of  a  few  lines  from 
a  poem  entitled  Berenice,  and  twenty-two  epigrams  in  the  Greek  Anthol 
ogy,  besides  one  upon  the  poet  himself,  the  production  probably  of  Artem- 
idorus.  The  Greek  author  of  a  few  sentences  on  the  characteristics  of 
the  poetry  of  Theocritus,  prefixed  to  his  works,  says  that  all  poetry  has 
three  characters,  the  Si7]y^iJ.aTiK6s,  the  5pa/j.aTiK6s,  and  the  p-ucrds,  and  that 
bucolic  poetry  is  a  mixture  of  every  form.  Bergk  has  recently  classed 
Ihe  poems  of  Theocritus  under  the  heads  of  Carmina  bucolica,  mimica,  lyr- 
jca,  epica,  and  epigrammata.1 

Of  the  thirty  so-called  idylls,  the  last  is  a  late  Anacreontic  of  scarcely 
any  poetic  merit,  and  has  no  claim  to  be  regarded  as  a  work  of  Theocri 
tus.  Of  the  others,  only  ten  belong  strictly  to  the  class  of  poems  which 
the  ancients  described  by  the  specific  names  of  /Sou/coAt/ca,  irot/aeviKa,  aliro\- 
i/ca,  or  by  the  first  of  these  words  used  in  a  generic  sense,  Bucolics,  or, 
as  we  say,  Pastoral  poems.  But,  taking  the  term  idyll  in  the  wider  sense, 
1  Rhcin.  Mws.,  1838-39,  vol.  vi..  p.  16,  scq<j. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  379 

we  must  also  include  under  it  several  of  the  poems  which  are  not  bucol 
ic,  but  which  are  pictures  of  the  life  of  the  common  people  of  Sicily.  In 
this  general  sense,  the  idylls,  properly  so  called,  are  the  first  eleven,  the 
fourteenth,  fifteenth,  and  twenty-first,  the  last  of  which  has  a  special  in 
terest,  as  being  the  only  representation  we  possess  of  the  life  of  Grecian 
fishermen  ;  the  second  and  fifteenth  are  evidently  pretty  close  imitations 
of  the  mimes  of  Sophron.  Those  idylls  of  which  the  genuineness  is  most 
doubtful  are  the  twelfth,  seventeenth,  eighteenth,  nineteenth,  twentieth, 
twenty-sixth,  twenty-seventh,  twenty-ninth,  and  thirtieth. 

The  metre  chiefly  employed  in  these  poems  is  the  heroic  hexameter, 
adapted  to  the  purposes  of  Theocritus  by  having  a  more  broken  move 
ment  substituted  for  the  sustained  and  stately  march  of  the  Homeric 
verse.  In  a  few  cases  other  metres  are  employed.  The  dialect  of  The 
ocritus  has  given  the  grammarians  considerable  trouble.  The  ancient 
critics  regarded  it  as  a  modification  of  the  Doric  dialect,  which  they  called 
"  new  Doric"  (via  Aupis) ;  and  some  of  the  modern  editors  have  carried 
this  notion  so  far  as  to  try  to  expunge  all  the  epic,  JEolic,  and  Ionic 
forms  which  the  best  MSS.  present.  The  fact,  however,  is,  that  The 
ocritus  purposely  employed  a  mixed  or  eclectic  dialect,  in  which  the  new 
or  softened  Doric  predominates.1 

The  editio  princeps  of  Theocritus,  in  folio,  containing  also  the  Works  and  Days  of 
Hesiod,  is  without  place  or  date,  tut  is  believed  to  have  been  printed  at  Milan  about 
1481.  There  is  another  very  early  edition  in  8vo,  without  place  or  date.  The  next  earli 
est  edition  is  that  of  Aldus,  containing  the  Idylls,  and  a  vast  mass  of  other  matter,  Ven 
ice,  1495,  fol.  The  chief  among  the  more  recent  editions  are  those  of  Reiske,  Vienna, 
1765,  2  vols.  small  4to  ;  of  Warton,  Oxford,  1770,  4to  ;  of  Brunck,  in  the  Analecta;  of 
Valckenaer,  Leyden,  1779-81,  8vo ;  reprinted  under  the  revision  of  Schaefer,  Leipzig, 
1810,  fol. ;  of  Heindorf,  Berlin,  1810,  8vo ;  of  Gaisford,  in  his  Poetas  Minores  Graci,  Ox 
ford,  1823;  of  Kiessling,  Leipzig,  1819,  8vo,  reprinted  with  Bion  and  Moschus,  London, 
1829,  2  vols.  8vo;  of  Briggs,  in  his  Bucolici  Graci,  Cambridge,  1821,  8vo ;  of  Meineke, 
Leipzig,  1825, 12mo  ;  of  Wiistemann,  in  Jacobs  and  Rost's  Bibliotheca  Graeca,  Gotha,  1830, 
8vo;  of  Wordsworth,  Cambridge,  1844,  8vo  ;  of  Ziegler,  Tubingen,  1844,  8vo ;  and  of 
Ameis,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca  (Poetce  Bucolici  et  Didactici),  Paris,  1846,  large  8vo. 
Most  of  the  editions  above  enumerated  contain  also  Bion  and  Moschus. 

2.  BION  (BiW)2  was  a  native  of  Smyrna,  or,  rather,  of  a  small  place 
called  Phlossa,  on  the  River  Meles,  near  Smyrna.3  All  that  we  know 
about  him  is  the  little  that  can  be  inferred  from  the  third  idyll  of  Moschus, 
who  laments  his  untimely  death.  The  time  at  which  he  lived  can  be 
pretty -accurately  determined  by  the  fact  that  he  was  older  than  Moschus, 
who  calls  himself  the  pupil  of  Bion.*  His  flourishing  period,  therefore, 
may  have  very  nearly  coincided  with  that  of  Theocritus,  and  may  be 
fixed  at  about  B.C.  280.  Moschus  states  that  Bion  left  his  native  coun 
try,  and  spent  the  last  years  of  his  life  in  Sicily,  cultivating  bucolic  poetry, 
the  natural  growth  of  that  island.  Whether  he  also  visited  Macedonia 
and  Thrace,  as  Moschus  intimates,5  is  uncertain,  since  it  may  be  that 
Moschus  mentions  those  countries  only  because  he  calls  Bion  the  Doric 
Orpheus.  He  died  of  poison,  which  had  been  administered  to  him  by 
several  persons,  who  afterward  received  their  well-deserved  punishment 

1  Jacobs,  Prcef.  ad  Anth.  Pal,  p.  xliii.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Suid.,  s.  v.  ©edtfpn-os.  4  Mosch.,  iii.,  96,  seqq.          *  Id.,  iii.,  17. 


380  GRETEK     LITERATURE. 

for  the  crime.  With  respect  to  the  relation  of  master  and  pupil  between 
Bion  and  Moschus,  we  can  not  say  any  thing  with  certainty,  except  that 
the  resemblance  between  the  productions  of  the  two  poets  obliges  us  to 
suppose,  at  least,  that  Moschus  imitated  Bion ;  and  this  may,  in  fact,  be 
all  that  is  meant  when  Moschus  calls  himself  a  disciple  of  the  latter. 

The  subjects  of  Bion's  poetry  were  the  songs  of  shepherds  and  love 
songs,  and  are  beautifully  described  by  Moschus  ;l  but  we  can  now  form 
only  a  partial  judgment  on  the  spirit  and  style  of  his  poetry,  on  account 
of  the  fragmentary  condition  in  which  his  works  have  come  down  to  us. 
Some  of  his  idylls  are  extant  entire,  but  of  others  we  have  only  frag 
ments.  Their  style  is  very  refined ;  the  sentiments  are  soft  and  senti 
mental  ;  and  his  versification,  which  is  exclusively  the  hexameter,  is  very 
fluent  and  elegant.  In  the  selection  and  management  of  his  subjects  he 
is  superior  to  Moschus ;  but  in  strength  and  depth  of  feeling,  and  in  the 
truthfulness  of  his  sentiments,  he  is  much  inferior  to  Theocritus.  This 
is  particularly  visible  in  the  largest  of  his  extant  poems,  the  'EiriTaQios 
'ASc«w8os.  He  is  usually  reckoned  among  the  bucolic  poets  ;  but  it  must 
be  remembered  that  this  name  is  not  confined  to  the  subjects  it  really  in 
dicates  ;  for,  in  the  time  of  Bion,  bucolic  poetry  also  embraced  that  class 
of  poems  in  which  the  legends  about  gods  and  heroes  were  treated  from 
an  erotic  point  of  view.  The  dialect  of  Bion  is,  like  that  of  Theocritus,  a 
mixed  Doric. 

In  the  first  editions  of  Theocritus  the  poems  of  Bion  are  mixed  with  those  of  the  former, 
and  the  first  who  separated  them  was  Mekerch,  in  his  edition  of  Bion  and  Moschus, 
Bruges,  1565,  4to.  In  most  of  the  subsequent  editions  of  Theocritus  the  remains  of  Bion 
and  Moschus  are  printed  at  the  end,  as  in  those  of  Valckenaer  and  others,  already  men 
tioned  under  the  head  of  Theocritus.  Among  the  separate  editions  may  be  mentioned 
those  of  Harles,  Erlangen,  1780,  8vo ;  of  Jacobs,  Gotha,  1795,  8vo ;  of  Teucher,  Leipzig, 
1793,  8vo  ;  of  Manso,  Leipzig,  1807,  8vo,  2d  ed.,  containing  an  elaborate  dissertation  on 
the  life  and  poetry  of  Bion,  a  commentary,  and  a  German  translation  ;  and  of  Hermann, 
Leipzig,  1849. 

MOSCHUS  (MoVxos),2  a  grammarian  and  bucolic  poet,  a  native  of  Syra 
cuse.  He  lived  about  the  close  of  the  third  century  B.C.,  and,  according 
to  Suidas,3  was  acquainted  with  Aristarchus.  He  calls  himself  a  pupil  of 
Bion  in  the  idyll  in  which  he  bewails  the  death  of  the  latter ;  but,  as  al 
ready  remarked  in  an  account  of  that  poet,  this  may  merely  mean  that 
Moschus  imitated  Bion.  Of  his  compositions  we  have  extant  four  idylls: 
1.  "Epws  SpaTTfTTjs.  2.  Eupc^TTT?.  3.  'E7rtTcfy>ios  Bicavos.  4.  Meydpa.  The  first 
three  are  written  in  the  mixed  or  new  Doric ;  the  last  in  the  Ionic  dialect, 
with  a  few  Dorisms.  Besides  these  we  have  three  small  pieces,  also 
called  idylls  by  the  commentators,  but  not  entitled  to  the  name,  an  epi 
gram  or  inscription,  and  two  fragments,  called  by  some  epigrams.  The 
idylls  of  Moschus  were  at  first  intermixed  with  those  of  Theocritus,  and 
one  or  two  of  those  ascribed  to  Theocritus  have  been,  though  without 
sufficient  reason,  supposed  to  be  the  productions  of  Moschus.  Eudocia4 
ascribes  to  Theocritus  the  third  of  the  idylls  of  Moschus ;  but  a  careful 
separation  has  been  made  on  the  authority  of  MSS.  and  quotations  in 
Stobseus.  To  judge  from  the  pieces  which  are  extant,  Moschus  was 
"  i.,  82.  »~ Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  s.  v.  M6<rxoj.  *  Eudocia,  p.  408. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  381 

capable  of  writing  with  elegance  and  liveliness ;  but  he  is  inferior  to 
Bion,  and  comes  still  farther  behind  Theocritus.  His  style  labors  under 
an  excess  of  polish  and  ornament.  The  elegy  on  Bion  is  remarkable  for 
sweetness  of  numbers  and  luxuriance  of  imagery,  but  is  perhaps  too  la 
bored  for  real  sorrow. 

The  idylls  of  Moschus  are  generally  printed  with  those  of  Theocritus  and  Bion.   An  ac 
count  of  the  editions  may  be  seen  under  those  heads. 

IV.     DRAMATIC     POETRY. 

I.  The  Alexandrean  grammarians,  in  arranging  their  canon,  made,  it 
will  be  remembered,  two  classes  of  tragic  writers,  the  first  containing 
the  great  masters  who  flourished  prior  to  the  death  of  Alexander  the 
Great,  and  the  second  consisting  of  what  were  denominated  the  "  Tragic 
Pleiades." 

II.  The  seven  poets  forming  the  class  denominated  the  "  Tragic  Pleia 
des"  were,  as  we  have  already  mentioned,  Alexander  the  ./Etolian,  Philis- 
cus  of  Corcyra,  Sositheus,  Homer  the  younger,  JEantides,  Sosiphanes,  and 
Lycophron. 

III.  The  dramatic  works,  however,  of  the  poets  of  the  Alexandrine 
school  differed  in  a  very  important  particular  from  those  produced  during 
the  Attic  period.     The  tragedies  now  composed  were  no  longer  exhibited 
before  the  people  in  the  public  theatre,  but  were  meant  for  the  closet,  be 
ing  written  for  the  amusement  of  princes  and  their  courtiers,  and  for  a 
small  circle  of  connoisseurs. 

IV.  We  will  now  give  a  brief  sketch  of  each  of  these  poets  in  the  order 
in  which  they  have  been  enumerated. 

1.  ALEXANDER  J^TOLUS  ('A\e£ai>8pos  6  AiT<a\6s),1  a  Greek  poet  and  gram 
marian,  lived  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus.     He  was  a  native  of 
Pleuron,  in  ^Etolia,  but  spent  the  greater  part  of  his  life  at  Alexandrea. 
He  had  an  office  in  the  library  at  Alexandrea,  and  was  commissioned  by 
the  king  to  make  a  collection  of  all  the  tragedies  and  satiric  dramas  that 
were  extant.     He  spent  some  time,  together  with  Antagoras  and  Aratus, 
at  the  court  of  Antigonus  Gonatas.2     Notwithstanding  the  distinction 
which  he  enjoyed  as  a  tragic  poet,  he  appears  to  have  had  greater  merit 
as  a  writer  of  epic  poems,  elegies,  and  epigrams.     Of  his  elegies  some 
beautiful  fragments  are  still  extant.     All  the  fragments  of  this  writer  are 
collected  by  Capellmann,  Bonn,  1829,  8vo.     Compare  Welcker,  Die  Griech. 
Tragodien,  p.  1263,  seqq. ;  Diintzer,  Die  Fragm.  der  Episch.  Poesie  der 
Griechen,  von  Alexander  dem  Grossen,  &c.,  p.  7,  seqq. 

2.  PHILISCUS  (*jAi<r/eos)  of  Corcyra,  a  distinguished  tragic  poet,  was 
also  a  priest  of  Bacchus,  and  in  that  character  was  present  at  the  coro 
nation  procession  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,3  in  B.C.  284.     Pliny*  states 
that  his  portrait  was  painted  in  the  attitude  of  meditation  by  Protogenes, 
who  is  known  to  have  been  still  alive  in  B.C.  304.     It  seems,  therefore, 
that  the  time  of  Philiscus  must  be  extended  to  an  earlier  period  than 
that  assigned  to  him  by  Suidas,  who  merely  says  that  he  lived  under 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Aratus,  Phanom.,  ii.,  p.  431,  433,  &c.,  ed.  Buhle. 

3  Athen.,v.,  p.  198,  C.  *  Plin.,  H.  N.,  xxx.,  10,  36. 


382  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Ptolemy  Philadelphia.  He  wrote  forty-two  dramas,  of  which  we  know 
nothing.  The  choriambic  hexameter  verse  was  named  after  Philiscus,  on 
account  of  his  frequent  use  of  it.'  There  is  much  dispute  whether  the 
name  should  be  written  $i\t(TKos  or  <f>iAt/cos,  but  the  former  appears  to  be 
the  true  form,  though  he  himself,  for  the  sake  of  the  metre,  used  the  latter. 

3.  SOSITHEUS  (2w<rt0eos),2  of  Syracuse  or  Athens,  or,  rather,  according 
to  Suidas,  of  Alexandrea  in  the  Troad,  was  the  antagonist  of  the  tragic 
poet  Homer.     He  flourished  about  B.C.  284,  and  wrote  both  in  poetry  and 
prose.3    The  remains  of  his  works  consist  of  two  lines  from  his  "A6\tos, 
and  a  considerable  fragment  of  twenty-four  lines  from  his  AaQvis  or  An-u- 
fpa-as,  which  appears  to  have  been  a  drama  pastoral  in  its  scene,  and  in 
its  form  and  character  very  similar  to  the  old  satyric  dramas  of  the  Attic 
tragedians.     The  remains  of  Sositheus  are  given  by  Wagner,  Frag.  Trag. 
Grac.f  in  Didot's  Billiothcca  Grczca,  p.  149,  seqq. 

4.  HOMER  ("O^Tjpos),  a  grammarian  and  tragic  poet  of  Byzantium,  flour 
ished  in  the  time  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  about  B.C.  280.     The  number 
of  his  dramas  is  differently  stated  at  forty-five,  forty-seven,  and  fifty-sev 
en.     His  poems  are  entirely  lost,  with  the  exception  of  one  title,  Eury- 
pyleia*     Compare  Welcker,  Die  Griech.  Tragod.,  p.  1251,  seqq. 

5.  ^EANTIDES  (AmimSTjs),  a  tragic  poet  of  Alexandrea,  of  whom  nothing 
particular  is  known.     He  lived  in  the  time  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus. 

6.  SOSIPHANES  (2ft>£n0av7?s),  a  native  of  Syracuse,  according  to  Suidas, 
exhibited  seventy-three  dramas,  and  gained  seven  victories.     He  was 
born  at  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Philip,  or,  as  others  stated,  in  that  of  Al 
exander,  between  B.C.  340  and  B.C.  330.     Of  his  plays,  the  only  remains 
are  one  title,  MeAe'crypos,  and  a  very  fe\v  lines  from  it  and  other  plays.5 
These  are  contained  in  Wagner's  Frag.  Trag.  Gr&c.,  in  Didot's  Bibliothc- 
ca  Grceca,  p.  157. 

7.  LYCOPHRON  (Au/cJ^>p&jj'),6  a  celebrated  Alexandrean  grammarian  and 
poet,  was  a  native  of  Chalcis,  in  Eubrea.     He  lived  at  Alexandrea  undei 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  who  intrusted  to  him  the  arrangement  of  the  works 
of  the  comic  poets  contained  in  the  Alexandrean  library.     In  the  execu 
tion  of  this  commission  Lycophron  drew  up  a  very  extensive  work  on 
comedy  (Trepl  /cayiwSias),  which  appears  to  have  embraced  the  whole  sub 
ject  of  the  history  and  nature  of  the  Greek  comedy,  together  with  ac 
counts  of  the  comic  poets,  and,  besides  this,  many  matters  bearing  indi 
rectly  upon  the  interpretation  of  the  comedians.7    Nothing  more  is  known 
of  his  life.     Ovid  states  that  he  was  killed  by  an  arrow.8    As  a  poet, 
Lycophron  obtained  a  place  in  the  Tragic  Pleiades  ;  but  there  is  scarcely 
a  fragment  of  his  tragedies  extant.     Suidas  gives  the  titles  of  twenty  of 
his  tragedies  ;  while  Tzetzes9  makes  their  number  forty-six  or  sixty-four. 
Four  lines  of  his  FleAou-i'Sai  are  quoted  by  Stobgeus.10     He  also  wrote  a 
satyric  drama  entitled  Mo/e'Srj^os,  in  which  he  ridiculed  his  fellow-coun 
tryman,  the  philosopher  Menedemus,  of  Eretria,11  who  nevertheless  high- 


1  Hephosst.,  p.  53.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Suid.,  s.  v.          *  Id.  ib. 

s  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  vol.  iii.,  s.  aa.  278,  259,  p.  502,  504.       «  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  vl 
7  Meineke,  Hist.  Crit.  Com.  Gr<zc.,  p.  9,  seqq.  8  Ovid,  Ibis,  533. 

'  .SVAoJ.m/,yr.,262,270.      10  .Sfo/>.,cxix.,  13.      "  Athen.,  x.,p.  420  ;  Diog.  Laert.,  ii.,  140 


ALEXANDRIN  K      H  E  R  I  O  D.  383 

ly  prized  the  tragedies  of  Lycophron.1  He  is  said  to  have  been  a  very 
skillful  composer  of  anagrams,  of  which  he  wrote  several  in  honor  of 
Ptolemy  and  Arsinoe. 

The  only  one  of  his  poems  which  has  come  down  to  us  is  the  Cassan 
dra  or  Alexandra.  This  is  neither  a  tragedy  nor  an  epic  poem,  but  a  long 
iambic  monologue  of  1474  verses,  in  which  Cassandra  is  made  to  proph 
esy  the  fall  of  Troy,  the  adventures  of  the  Grecian  and  Trojan  heroes, 
with  numerous  other  mythological  and  historical  events,  going  back  as 
far  as  the  Argonauts,  the  Amazons,  and  the  fables  of  lo  and  Europa,  and 
ending  with  Alexander  the  Great.  The  work  has  no  pretensions  to  po 
etical  merit.  It  is  simply  a  cumbrous  store  of  traditional  learning.  Sui- 
das  calls  it  o-fcoreu/fc?  wohjjiia,  "  the  dark  poem,"  and  its  author  himself 
obtained  the  epithet  of  a-KOTetv6s.  Its  stores  of  learning  and  its  obscurity 
alike  excited  the  efforts  of  the  ancient  grammarians,  several  of  whom 
'wrote  commentaries  on  the  poem.  Among  these  were  Theon,  Dection, 
and  Orus.  The  only  one  of  these  works  which  survives  is  the  scholia 
of  Isaac  and  John  Tzetzes,  who  flourished  about  A.D.  1150,  which  are 
far  more  valuable  than  the  poem  itself.  Lycophron,  indeed,  purposely 
enveloped  his  poem  in  the  deepest  obscurity.  There  is  no  artifice  to 
which  he  does  not  resort  to  prevent  his  being  clearly  understood.  He 
never  calls  any  one  by  his  true  name,  but  designates  him  by  some  cir 
cumstances  or  event  in  his  history.  He  abounds  in  unusual  construc 
tions,  separates  words  which  should  be  united,  uses  strange  terms  more 
or  less  obsolete,  forms  the  most  singular  compounds,  and  indulges  in  the 
boldest  and  most  startling  metaphors. 

A  question  has  been  raised  respecting  the  identity  of  Lycophron  the 
tragedian,  and  Lycophron  the  author  of  the  Cassandra.  From  some  lines 
of  the  poem  (1226,  segq.  ;  1446,  seqq.)  which  refer  to  Roman  history, 
Niebuhr  was  led  to  suppose  that  the  author  could  not  have  lived  before 
the  time  of  Flamininus  (about  B.C.  190)  ;  but  Welcker,  in  an  elaborate 
discussion  of  the  question,  has  shown  very  conclusively  that  these  lines 
are  interpolated. 

The  editio  princeps  of  Lycophron  was  the  Aldine,  printed  with  Pindar  and  Callimachus, 
Venice,  1513,  8vo  ;  the  next  was  that  of  Lacisius,  with  the  scholia,  Basle,  1546,  fol.  Of 
the  later  editions,  the  most  deserving  of  mention  are  those  of  Potter,  Oxford,  1697,  fol., 
reprinted  1702  ;  of  Reichard,  Leipzig,  1788,  8vo  ;  and  of  Bachmann,  Leipzig,  1830,  2 
vols.  8vo  (of  which  only  the  first  has  appeared),  to  which  must  be  added  the  admirable 
edition  of  the  scholia,  by  C.  G.  Miiller,  Leipzig,  1811,  3  vols.  8vo. 


I.  The  Middle  and  New  Comedy  having  been  already  treated  of  in  our 
account  of  the  Fourth  or  Attic  Period,  it  remains  merely  to  notice  a  spe 
cies  of  dramatic  composition  termed  by  the  Greeks  <j>\vaKoypa(p(a  or 


II.  This  was  a  species  of  burlesque  drama,  or  a  parody  of  tragedy,  and 

may  be  described  as  an  exhibition  of  the  subjects  of  tragedy  in  the  spirit 

and  style  of  comedy.     It  appears  to  have  existed  for  a  long  time  prior  to 

the  Alexandrine  period  as  a  popular  amusement  among  the  Greeks  of 

1   Oiog.  Laert.,  ii.,  133. 


384  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Southern  Italy  and  Sicily,  and  especially  at  Tarentum.    At  the  head  of 
the  writers  in  this  department  stands  Rhinthon. 

RHINTHON  ("PivQwv}  was  a  native  of  Syracuse  or  Tarentum,  and  flourish 
ed  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  I.  of  Egypt.  Suidas  places  him  at  the  head 
of  the  composers  of  the  burlesque  drama,  by  which  is  meant  that  he  was 
the  first  to  develop  it  in  a  written  form,  and  to  introduce  it  into  Greek 
literature,  since  it  had  already,  as  we  have  remarked,  existed  as  a  popu 
lar  amusement.  It  would  appear  from  the  fragments  of  Rhinthon  that 
the  comic  license  extended  to  the  metres  also,  which  are  sometimes  even 
more  irregular  than  in  the  Attic  comedians.1  Rhinthon  is  said  to  have 
written  thirty-eight  dramas.2 


CHAPTER  XXXIX. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD— continued. 
PROSE     COMPOSITION. 

I.  THE  peculiarities  of  the  Alexandrine  period  displayed  themselves 
also  in  prose  composition,  and  in  the  degree  of  importance  attached  to 
learning  and  scientific  acquirement.     Great  attention  was  -also  paid  to 
the  productions  of  earlier  writers,  and  they  were  frequently  made  the 
subject  of  commentary  and  illustration,  but  the  pure  and  correct  taste 
which  distinguished  these  productions  was  rarely  imitated.     Philosophy, 
however,  and  the  practical  sciences,  were  vigorously  cultivated,  and  the 
latter,  in  particular,  with  important  results. 

II.  The  Attic  dialect,  modified  under  Macedonian  influence  and  by  local 
circumstances,  had  now  become  the  common  language  of  prose  litera 
ture,  and  the  employment  of  different  dialects  was  discontinued. 

I.     HISTORY. 

In  our  account  of  the  historical  writers  of  this  period  will  be  found 
some  who  do  not  strictly  belong  to  a  course  of  Grecian  literature,  but 
who,  nevertheless,  from  certain  circumstances  connected  with  them,  or 
from  the  nature  of  the  subjects  on  which  they  wrote,  can  not  well  be 
passed  over.  The  whole  number  of  writers  is  as  follows  :  Hecat&us  of 
Abdera,  Berosus,  Abydcnus,  Manctho,  Diodes  of  Peparethus,  Tim&us,  Ara- 
tus  of  Sicyon,  Phylarchus,  Istcr,  and  Polybius,  to  whom  may  be  added  the 
mythological  writer  Apollodorus. 

I.  HECAT^EUS  ('EKaraios)*  of  Abdera,  often  confounded  with  Hecataeus  of 
Miletus,  was  a  contemporary  of  Alexander  the  Great  and  Ptolemy,  the 
son  of  Lagus,  and  appears  to  have  accompanied  the  former  on  his  Asiatic 
expedition  as  far  as  Syria.  He  wras  a  pupil  of  the  skeptic  Pyrrho,  and  is 
himself  called  a  philosopher,  critic,  and  grammarian.4  From  the  manner 
in  which  he  is  spoken  of  by  Eusebius,5  we  must  infer  that  he  was  a  man 
of  great  reputation,  on  account  of  his  extensive  knowledge,  as  well  as  for 

1  Hephaest.,  p.  9,  ed.  Gaisf.  2  Suid.,  s.  v.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

*  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Joseph,  c.  Apion.,  i.,  22.  5  Praep.  Evang.,  ix.,  p.  239. 


A  L  E  X  A  N  D  K  I  N  K     P  K  R  I  0  D.  385 


his  practical  wisdom  (irepl  ras  irpd^eis  iKavtararos).     In  the  reign  of  the 
first  Ptolemy,  he  travelled  up  the  Nile  as  far  as  Thebes.     He  was  the 
author  of  several  works,  of  which,  however,  only  a  small  number  of  frag 
ments  have  come  down  to  us.     1.  A  History  of  Egypt.1     2.  A  work  on 
the  Hyperboreans*     3.  A  History  of  the  Jews,  of  which  the  book  on  Abra 
ham,  mentioned  by  Josephus,3  was  probably  only  a  portion.     This  work 
is  frequently  referred  to  by  the  ancients,  but  it  was  declared  spurious, 
even  by  Origen,4  and  modern  critics  are  divided  in  their  opinions.     The 
fragments  of  Hecataeus  have  been  collected  by  Zorn,  Hecatai  Abderita 
Fragmenta,  Altona,  1730,  8vo  ;  by  F.  Creuzer,  in  his  Hist.  Gr<zc.  Antiq. 
Fragm.,  Heidelberg,  1806,  8vo  ;  and  by  C.  Miiller,  in  his  Fragm.  Histor. 
Grac.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  384,  seqq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  Paris,  1848,  8vo. 
II.  BEROSUS  (Brjpa)ff6s  or  BrjpwaWs),5  a  priest  of  Belus,  at  Babylon,  and  an 
historical  writer.     His  name  is  usually  considered  to  be  the  same  as  Bar 
or  Ber  Oseas,  that  is,  "  son  of  Oseas."6     He  was  born  in  the  reign  of 
Alexander  the  Great,  and  lived  till  that  of  Antiochus  II.,  surnamed  ®e6s 
(B.C.  261-246),  in  whose  reign  he  wrote  his  history  of  Babylonia.7     Re 
specting  his  personal  history  scarcely  any  thing  is  known  ;  but  he  must 
have  been  a  man  of  education  and  extensive  learning,  and  was  well  ac 
quainted  with  the  Greek  language,  which  the  conquests  of  Alexander  had 
diffused  over  a  great  part  of  Asia.     His  history  was  in  three  books,  and 
is  sometimes  called  BajSuAowKa,  and  sometimes  XaASaiW,  or  'lo-ropiai 
XaASal'/cai.    The  work  itself  is  lost  ;  but  we  possess  several  fragments  of 
it,  which  are  preserved  in  Josephus,  Eusebius,  Syncellus,  and  the  Chris 
tian  Fathers,  who  made  great  use  of  the  work,  for  Berosus  seems  to  have 
been  acquainted  with  the  sacred  books  of  the  Jews,  whence  his  state 
ments  often  agree  with  those  of  the  Old  Testament.    From  the  fragments 
extant  we  see  that  the  work  embraced  the  earliest  traditions  about  the 
human  race,  a  description  of  Babylonia  and  its  population,  and  a  chrono 
logical  list  of  its  kings  down  to  the  time  of  Cyrus  the  Great.    The  history 
of  Assyria,  Media,  and  even  Armenia,  seem  to  have  been  constantly  kept 
in  view  also.     There  is  a  marked  difference,  in  many  instances,  between 
the  statements  of  Ctesias  and  those  of  Berosus  ;  but  it  is  erroneous  to 
infer  from  this,  as  some  have  done,  that  Berosus  forged  some  of  his  state 
ments.     The  difference  appears  sufficiently  accounted  for  by  the  circum 
stance  that  Ctesias  had  recourse  to  Assyrian  and  Persian  sources,  while 
Berosus  followed  the  Babylonian,  Chaldaean,  and  the  Jewish,  which  neces 
sarily  placed  the  same  events  in  a  different  light,  and  may  frequently  have 
differed  in  their  substance  altogether. 

Berosus  is  also  mentioned  as  one  of  the  earliest  writers  on  astronomy, 
astrology,  and  similar  subjects  ;  but  what  Pliny,  Vitruvius,  and  Seneca 
have  preserved  of  him  on  these  subjects  does  not  give  us  a  high  idea  of 
his  astronomical  or  mathematical  knowledge.  Pliny  relates8  that  the 

Diod.  Sic.,  i.,  47  ;  Phot.  Cod.,  244. 
Schol.  ad  Apollon.  Rhod.,  ii.,  675;  Diod.  Sic.,  ii.,  47. 
Joseph.,  Ant.  Jud.,  i.,  7.  4  Orig.  c.  Cels.,  i.,  15. 

Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  6  Scalig.,  Animadv.  ad  Euseb.,  p.  248. 

Tatian,  adv.  Gent..  58,  •  Plin.,  H.  N.,  vii.,  37. 

R 


386  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Athenians  erected  a  statue  to  him  in  a  gymnasium,  with  a  gilt  tongue  to 
honor  his  extraordinary  predictions.  Vitruvius1  attributes  to  him  the  in 
vention  of  a  semicircular  sun-dial  (hemicyclium),  and  states  that,  in  his 
later  years,  he  settled  in  the  island  of  Cos,  where  he  founded  a  school  of 
astrology. 

The  fragments  of  the  Ba/SvAwvi/ca  are  collected  at  the  end  of  Scaliger's  work,  De  Em- 
endatione  Temporum,  and,  more  complete,  in  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Gr&c.,  xiv.,  p.  175,  seqq.,  of 
the  old  edition.  They  are  also  given  by  Richter,  Ecrosi  Chald.  Histories  quce  supersunt, 
cum  Comment,  de  Berosi  vita,  &c.,  Leipzig,  1825,  8vo,  and  by  C.Miiller,  in  the  Fragm. 
Histor.  Grose.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  495,  seqq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotlieca  Grasca,  Paris,  1848,  8vo.  The 
work  entitled  Berosi  Antiquitatum  libri  quinque,  cum  commentariis  Joannis  Annii,  which 
appeared  at  Rome  in  1498,  fol.,  and  was  afterward  often  reprinted,  and  even  translated 
into  Italian,  is  one  of  the  many  fabrications  of  Giovanni  Nanni,  a  Dominican  monk  of 
Viterbo,  better  known  under  the  name  of  Annius  of  Viterbo,  who  died  in  1502. 

III.  ABYDENUS  ('A/3u5?7i/<fc),  a  Greek  historian  of  uncertain  date,  accord 
ing  to  some,  the  contemporary  and  pupil  of  Berosus,  according  to  others, 
as  late  as  the  second  or  third  century  of  our  era.     He  wrote  a  history  of 
Assyria  ('Acrtru/na/ca).     We  know  that  he  made  use  of  the  works  of  Me- 
gasthenes  and  Berosus,  and  Cyrillus  states3  that  he  wrote  in  the  Ionic 
dialect.     Several  fragments  of  his  work  are  preserved  by  Eusebius,  Cyril 
lus,  and  Syncellus.     It  was  particularly  valuable  for  chronology.     An  im 
portant  fragment,  which  clears  up  some  difficulties  in  Assyrian  history, 
has  been  discovered  in  the  Armenian  translation  of  the  Chroxicon  of 
Eusebius.3    The  fragments  of  his  history  have  been  published  by  Scali- 
ger,  in  his  work  De  Emendatione  Temporum ;  by  Richter,  Berosi  Chaldcco- 
rum  Historic,  &c.,  Leipzig,  1825  ;  and  by  C.  Miiller,  in  his  Fragm.  Histor. 
Grcec.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  278,  seqq.,  in  Didot's  Billiotheca  Gr<zca,  Paris,  1851,  8vo. 

IV.  MANETHO  (Mai/e0ws  or  Mave0<4j/),4  an  Egyptian  priest  of  the  city  of 
Sebennytus,  who  lived  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  I.,  and  probably  also  in  that 
of  his  successor,  Ptolemy  Philadelphus.     His  original  Egyptian  name  is 
differently  given  by  modern  scholars.    According  to  Bunsen,5  it  was  Mane- 
thoth,  that  is,  Md-en-thoth,  or  "the  one  given  by  Thoth,"  which  would  be 
expressed  by  the  Greek  Hermodotus  or  Hermodorus.    According  to  Lep- 
sius,  however,  it  was  Mai-en-thoth,6  or  "  beloved  by  Thoth,"  while  Fruin 
makes  it  to  have  been  Ma-net  or  Md-Neith,  i.  e.,  "  qui  Neith  deam  amat."7 

Manetho  had  in  antiquity  the  reputation  of  having  attained  to  the  high 
est  possible  degree  of  wisdom,8  and  it  seems  to  have  been  this  very  rep 
utation  which  induced  later  impostors  to  fabricate  books,  and  publish 
them  under  his  name.  The  fables  and  mystical  fancies  which  thus  be 
came  current  as  the  productions  of  the  Egyptian  sage  were  the  reason 
why  Manetho  was  looked  upon,  even  by  some  of  the  ancients  themselves, 
as  a  half-mythical  personage,  like  Epimenides  of  Crete,  of  whose  personal 
existence  and  history  no  one  was  able  to  form  any  distinct  notion.  The 
consequence  has  been  that  the  fragments  of  his  genuine  work  did  riot 

Vitruv.,  ix.,  4  ;  x.,  7,  9.       2  Cyrill.  adv.  Julian.,  p.  8,  seq.       3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

Id.  ib.,  s.  v.  5  Egypt's  Place  in  Universal  History,  vol.  i.,  p.  59,  Eng.  trans. 

Lep.iius,  Chron.,  i.,  p.  405  ;  Plutarch,  Ms  and  Osiris,  p.  180,  ed.  Parthey. 

Fruin,  Maneth.  Reliq.,  1847,  p.  xxviii. 

Syncell.,  Chronogr.,  p.  32,  ed.  Dindorf;  Plut.,  De  Is.  et  Os.,  9. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  387 

meet,  down  to  the  most  recent  times,  with  that  degree  of  attention  which 
they  deserved,  although  the  inscriptions  on  the  Egyptian  monuments 
furnish  the  most  satisfactory  confirmation  of  some  portions  of  his  work 
that  have  come  down  to  us.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Manetho  be 
longed  to  the  class  of  priests,  but  whether  he  was  high-priest  of  Egypt  is 
uncertain,  since  we  read  this  statement  only  in  some  MSS.  of  Suidas, 
and  in  one  of  the  productions  of  the  pseudo-Manetho.  Respecting  his 
personal  history  scarcely  any  thing  is  known  beyond  the  fact  that  he 
lived  in  the  reign  of  the  first  Ptolemy,  with  whom  he  came  in  contact  in 
consequence  of  his  wisdom  and  learning.  The  circumstance  to  which 
Manetho  owes  his  great  reputation  in  antiquity,  as  well  as  in  modern 
times,  is,  that  he  was  the  first  Egyptian  who  gave  in  the  Greek  language 
an  account  of  the  doctrines,  wisdom,  history,  and  chronology  of  his  coun 
try,  and  based  his  information  upon  the  ancient  works  of  the  Egyptians 
themselves,  and  more  especially  upon  their  sacred  books.  The  object 
of  his  works  was  thus  of  a  two-fold  nature,  being  at  once  theological  and 
historical.1 

The  work  in  which  he  explained  the  doctrines  of  the  Egyptians  con 
cerning  the  gods,  the  laws  of  morality,  the  origin  of  the  gods  and  the 
world,  seems  to  have  borne  the  title  of  Tw  QvffiKuv  eVtro^.2  Various 
statements,  which  were  derived  either  from  this  same  or  a  similar  work, 
are  preserved  in  Plutarch's  treatise  De  Iside  et  Osiri,  and  in  some  other 
writers,  who  confirm  the  statements  of  Plutarch. 

Suidas  mentions  a  work  on  Cypki  (KV$I),  or  the  sacred  incense  of  the 
Egyptians,  its  preparation  and  mixture,  as  taught  in  the  sacred  books, 
and  the  same  is  referred  to  by  Plutarch  at  the  end  of  his  above-mentioned 
treatise.  In  all  the  passages  in  which  statements  from  Manetho  are  pre 
served  concerning  the  religious  arid  moral  doctrines  of  the  Egyptians,  he 
appears  as  a  man  of  a  sober  and  intelligent  mind,  and  of  profound  knowl 
edge  of  the  religious  affairs  of  his  own  country ;  and  the  presumption, 
therefore,  must  be,  that  in  his  historical  works,  too,  his  honesty  was  not 
inferior  to  his  learning,  and  that  he  ought  not  to  be  made  responsible  for 
the  blunders  of  transcribers  and  copyists,  or  the  forgeries  of  later  im 
postors. 

The  historical  productions  of  Manetho,  although  lost,  are  far  better 
known  than  his  theological  works.  Josephus3  mentions  the  great  work 
under  the  title  of  History  of  Egypt,  and  quotes  some  passages  verbatim 
from  it,  which  show  that  it  was  a  pleasing  narrative  in  good  Greek.4 
The  s'ame  author  informs  us  that  Manetho  controverted  and  corrected 
many  of  the  statements  of  Herodotus.  The  Egyptian  History  of  Mane 
tho  was  divided  into  three  parts  or  books.  The  first  contained  the  history 
of  the  country  previous  to  the  thirty  dynasties,  or  what  may  be  termed 
the  mythology  of  Egypt,  and  also  of  the  first  eleven  dynasties  of  mortal 
kings.  Tne  second  opened  with  the  twelfth  and  concluded  with  the  nine 
teenth  dynasty ;  and  the  third  gave  the  history  of  the  remaining  eleven 
dynasties,  and  concluded  with  an  account  of  Nectanabis,  the  last  of  the 

i  Euseb.,  Prap.  Ev.,  ii.,  init.  a  Ding.  Laert.,  Procem.,  4  10,  seq, 

3  Ant.  Jud.,  i.,  3.  9.  *  c,  Apion.,  i.,  14.  srqq. 


388  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

native  Egyptian  kings.  These  dynasties  are  preserved  in  Julius  Africa- 
nus  and  Eusebius  (most  correctly  in  the  Armenian  version),  who,  howev 
er,  has  introduced  various  interpolations.  According  to  the  calculation 
of  Manetho,  the  thirty  dynasties,  beginning  with  Menes,  filled  a  period  of 
3555  years.  The  lists  of  the  Egyptian  kings  and  the  duration  of  their 
several  reigns  were  undoubtedly  derived  by  him  from  genuine  documents, 
and  their  correctness,  so  far  as  they  are  not  interpolated,  is  said  to  be 
confirmed  by  the  inscribed  monuments  which  it  has  been  the  privilege  of 
our  time  to  decipher.1 

There  exists  an  astrological  poem,  entitled  'A7roTe\eo>icmKa,  in  six 
books,  which  bears  the  name  of  Manetho ;  but  it  is  now  generally  ac 
knowledged  that  this  poem,  which  is  mentioned  also  by  Suidas,  can  not 
have  been  written  before  the  fifth  century  of  our  era.  A  good  edition  of 
it  was  published  by  Axt  and  Rigler,  Cologne,  1832,  8vo.  Whether  this 
poem  was  written  with  a  view  to  deception,  under  the  name  of  Manetho, 
or  whether  it  is  actually  the  production  of  a  person  of  that  name,  is  un 
certain.  But  there  is  a  work  which  is  undoubtedly  a  forgery,  and  was 
made  with  a  view  to  harmonize  the  chronology  of  the  Jews  and  Christians 
with  that  of  the  Egyptians.  This  work  is  often  referred  to  by  Syncellus, 
who  says  that  the  author  lived  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  and 
wrote  a  wrork  on  the  Dog-star  (rj  fiifi\os  TTJS  2c60eos),  which  he  dedicated 
to  the  king.  The  very  introduction,  however,  to  this  book,  which  Syn 
cellus  quotes,  is  so  full  of  extraordinary  things  and  absurdities,  that  it 
clearly  betrays  its  late  author. 

The  work  of  the  genuine  Manetho  was  gradually  superseded :  first  by 
epitomizers,  by  whom  the  genuine  history  and  chronology  were  obscured ; 
next  by  the  hasty  work  of  Eusebius,  and  the  interpolations  he  made  for 
the  purpose  of  supporting  his  system ;  afterward  by  the  impostor  who 
assumed  the  name  of  Manetho  of  Sebennytus,  and  mixed  truth  with  false 
hood  ;  and  lastly,  by  a  chronicle,  in  which  the  dynasties  of  Manetho  were 
arbitrarily  arranged  according  to  certain  cycles. 

The  fragments  of  Manetho  are  given  by  C.  Miiller,  in  his  Fragm.  Histor.  Grcec.,  vol.  ii., 
p.  511,  s£qq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  Paris,  1848,  8vo. 

V.  DIOCLES  (Ato/cA.7Js)  of  Peparethus,  a  Greek  historian  of  uncertain 
date,  but  who  belongs  to  some  part  of  the  period  which  we  are  consider 
ing.  He  was  the  earliest  Greek  historian  who  wrote  about  the  founda 
tion  of  Rome,  and  Q.  Fabius  Pictor  is  said  to  have  followed  him  in  a  great 
many  points.2  Diocles  was  prior,  therefore,  to  B.C.  223,  about  ^which 
time  Fabius  Pictor  flourished.  The  work  in  which  Diocles  made  men 
tion  of  the  founding  of  Rome  appears  to  have  been  entitled  Krureis,  and 
contained  accounts  of  the  origin  of  various  states  and  cities.  Whether 
Diocles,  however,  is  the  same  also  as  the  author  of  a  work  on  heroes 
(TTfpl  yp&uv  ff  ^07/110),  which  is  mentioned  by  Plutarch,3  and  of  a  history  of 
Persia  (IIep<n/ca),  which  is  quoted  by  Josephus,4  is  a  matter  of  uncertainty. 

The  fragments  of  Diocles  are  given  by  C.  Miiller,  in  his  Fragm.  Histor.  Grac.,  vol.  iii., 
p.  74,  seqq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graeca,  Paris,  1849,  8vo. 

1  Schall,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  215,  seqq. 

2  Plut,,  Rom..  3,  8  •  Ffstns,  s.  v.  Romam.         3  Qiuest.  Gra>r.,W.        *  Ant.  /?///.,  x.,  11,  1. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  389 

VI.  TIM^EUS  (TtVatos)1  of  Tauromenium,  in  Sicily,  the  celebrated  his 
torian,  was  the  son  of  Andromachus,  tyrant  of  that  place.  Timaeus  at 
tained  the  age  of  ninety-six,  and  though  we  do  not  know  the  exact  date 
either  of  his  birth  or  death,  we  can  not  be  far  wrong  in  placing  his  birth 
in  B.C.  352,  and  his  death  in  B.C.  256.  Timaeus  received  instruction 
from  Philiscus  the  Milesian,  a  disciple  of  Isocrates  ;  but  we  have  no  far 
ther  particulars  of  his  life,  except  that  he  was  banished  from  Sicily  by 
Agathocles,  and  passed  his  exile  at  Athens,  where  he  had  lived  fifty 
years  when  he  wrote  the  thirty-fourth  book  of  his  history.2  The  great 
work  of  Timaeus  was  a  history  of  Sicily  from  the  earliest  times  to  B.C. 
264,  with  which  year  Polybius  commences  the  introduction  to  his  work. 
This  history  was  one  of  great  extent.  We  have  a  quotation  from  the 
thirty-eighth  book,  and  there  were  probably  many  books  after  this.  The 
work  appears  to  have  been  divided  into  several  great  sections,  which  are 
quoted  with  separate  titles,  though  they,  in  reality,  formed  a  part  of  one 
great  whole.  The  last  five  books  contained  the  history  of  Agathocles. 
Timaeus  wrote  the  history  of  Pyrrhus  as  a  separate  work,3  but  as  it  falls 
within  the  time  treated  of  in  his  general  history,  it  may  almost  be  regarded 
as  an  episode  of  the  latter. 

The  value  and  authority  of  Timaeus  as  an  historian  have  been  most 
vehemently  attacked  by  Polybius  in  many  parts  of  his  work.  He  main 
tains  that  Timaeus  was  totally  deficient  in  the  first  qualifications  of  an 
historian,  as  he  possessed  no  practical  knowledge  of  war  or  politics,  and 
never  attempted  to  obtain  by  travelling  a  personal  acquaintance  with 
the  places  and  countries  he  described  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  confined  his 
residence  to  one  spot  for  fifty  years,  and  there  gained  all  his  knowledge 
from  books  alone.  Polybius  also  remarks,  that  Timseus  had  so  little 
power  of  observation,  and  so  weak  a  judgment,  that  he  was  unable  to 
give  a  correct  account  even  of  the  things  he  had  seen,  and  of  the  places 
he  had  visited  ;  and  adds,  that  he  was  likewise  so  superstitious,  that  his 
work  abounded  with  old  traditions  and  well-known  fables,  while  things 
of  graver  importance  were  entirely  omitted.  Polybius  also  charges  him 
with  frequently  stating  willful  falsehoods,  and  of  indulging  in  all  kinds  of 
calumnies  against  the  most  distinguished  men,  such  as  Homer,  Aristotle, 
and  Theophrastus.  These  charges  are  repeated  by  Diodorus  and  other 
ancient  writers,  among  whom  Timaeus  earned  so  bad  a  character  by  his 
slanders  and  calumnies,  that  he  was  nicknamed  Epitimaus  ('ETnrifj.aios). 
or  the*  Fault-finder.* 

Most  of  the  charges  of  Polybius  against  Timseus  are  unquestionably 
founded  upon  truth  ;  but  from  the  statements  of  other  writers,  and  from 
the  fragments  which  we  possess  of  TimEeus's  own  work,  we  are  led  to 
conclude  that  Polybius  has  greatly  exaggerated  the  defects  of  Timaeus, 
and  has  omitted  to  mention  his  peculiar  excellences.  Nay,  several  of 
the  very  points  which  Polybius  regarded  as  great  blemishes  in  his  work, 
were,  in  reality,  some  of  its  greatest  merits.  Thus  it  was  one  of  the 
great  merits  of  Timaeus,  for  which  he  is  loudly  denounced  by  Polybius, 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Riog.,  s.  v.  2  Polyb.,  Exc.  Vat.,  p.  389,  39sT~ 

3  Dionys.,  i.,  6  ;  Cic.,  Ep.  ad  Farn,,  \.,  12.  *  Athfn.,  vi.,  p.  272,  B, 


390  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

that  he  attempted  to  give  the  myths  in  their  simplest  and  most  genuine 
form,  as  related  by  the  most  ancient  writers.  Timaeus,  also,  collected 
the  materials  of  his  history  with  the  greatest  diligence  and  care,  a  fact 
which  even  Polybius  is  compelled  to  admit.  He  likewise  paid  very  great 
attention  to  chronology,  and  was  the  first  writer  who  introduced  the 
practice  of  recording  events  by  Olympiads,  which  was  adopted  by  almost 
all  subsequent  writers  of  Greek  history.  For  this  purpose  he  drew  up  a 
list  of  the  Olympic  conquerors,  which  is  called  by  Suidas  'OAi^uTTioj/T/cat  % 
XpovMo.  irpa£i8ia.  Cicero  formed  a  very  different  opinion  of  the  merits  of 
Timaeus  from  that  of  Polybius.  He  says,  "  Tim&us,  quantum  judicare 
possim,  longe  eruditissimus,  et  rerum  copia  et  sententiarurn  varietate  abundant- 
issimus,  et  ipsa  compositione  verborum  non  impolitus,  magnam  eloquentiam  ad 
scribendum  attulit,  sed  nullum  usurn  forensem."1 

The  fragments  of  Timseus  have  been  collected  by  Goller,  in  his  treatise  De  situ  et  orig- 
ine  Syracusarum,  Leipzig,  1818,  p.  209,  seqq. ;  and  by  C.  and  Th.  Miiller,  in  the  Fragm. 
Histor.  Grcsc.,  vol.  i.,  p.  193,  seqq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  Paris,  1841,  8vo. 

VII.  ARATUS  ("Aparos)2  of  Sicyon,  the  celebrated  general  of  the  Achseans, 
born  at  Sicyon  B.C.  271,  wrote  Commentaries,  being  a  history  of  his  own 
times  down  to  B.C.  220,  which  Polybius  characterizes  as  clearly  written 
and  faithful  records.     But  to  this  latter  praise  they  were  not  entitled. 
They  formed  Plutarch's  principal  authority  for  the  Life  of  Aratus.     The 
fragments  are  given  by  C.  Miiller,  in  the  Fragm.  Histor.  Grcec.,  vol.  iii.,  p. 
21,  seqq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graca,  Paris,  1849,  8vo. 

VIII.  PHYLARCHUS  ($v\apxos),3  a  contemporary  of  Aratus,  probably  a 
native  of  Naucratis,  in  Egypt,  but  who  spent  the  greater  part  of  his  life 
at  Athens.     We  may  place  him  at  about  B.C.  215.     His  great  work  was 
a  history  in  twenty-eight  books,  embracing  a  period  of  fifty-two  years, 
from  the  expedition  of  Pyrrhus  into  the  Peloponnesus,  B.C.  272,  to  the 
death  of  Cleomenes,  B.C.  220.     Phylarchus  is  vehemently  attacked  by 
Polybius,*  who  charges  him  with  falsifying  history  through  his  partiality 
to  Cleomenes,  and  his  hatred  against  Aratus  and  the  Achaeans.     The 
accusation  is  probably  not  unfounded,  but  it  might  be  retorted  with  equal 
justice  upon  Polybius,  who  has  fallen  into  the  opposite  error  of  exagger 
ating  the  merits  of  Aratus  and  his  party,  and  depreciating  Cleomenes, 
whom  he  certainly  has  both  misrepresented  and  misunderstood.5     The 
accusation  of  Polybius  is  repeated  by  Plutarch,6  but  it  comes  with  rather 
a  bad  grace  from  the  latter  writer,  since  there  can  be  little  doubt,  as 
Lucht  has  shown,  that  his  lives  of  Agis  and  Cleomenes  are  taken  almost 
entirely  from  Phylarchus,  to  whom  he  is  likewise  indebted  for  the  latter 
part  of  his  life  of  Pyrrhus.     The  vivid  and  graphic  style  of  Phylarchus 
was  well  suited  to  Plutarch's  purpose.    It  appears,  it  is  true,  to  have  been 
too  oratorical  and  declamatory,  but  at  the  same  time  to  have  been  lively 
and  attractive,  and  to  have  brought  the  events  of  the  history  vividly  be 
fore  the  reader's  mind.     He  was,  however,  very  negligent  in  the  arrange 
ment  of  his  words,  as  Dionysius  has  remarked.     Suidas  mentions  other 

1  Cic.,  De  Orat.,  ii.,  14 ;  compare  Brut.,  95.  a  Smith,  Diet.,  s.  v. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr,,  s.  v.  *  Polyb.,  ii.,  56,  seqq. 

6  Niebuhr,  Kleine  Schriften,\ol.  i.,  p.  270,  note.  6  Vit.  Arat.,  38. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  391 

works  of  his  besides  his  history,  but  they  were  comparatively  unimport 
ant. 

The  fragments  of  Phylarchus  have  been  collected  by  Lucht,  Leipzig,  1836 ;  by  Bruck 
ner,  Breslau,  1838,  and  by  C.  and  Th.  Miiller,  in  the  Fragm.  Histor.  Grose.,  vol.  i.,  p.  334, 
seqq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  Paris,  1841,  8vo. 

IX.  ISTER  ("Itrrpos),1  a  Greek  historian,  who  is  sometimes  called  a  na 
tive  of  Gyrene,  sometimes  of  Macedonia,  and  sometimes  of  Paphos,  in  the 
island  of  Cyprus.     These  contradictory  statements  are  reconciled  by  Sie- 
belis,  on  the  supposition  that  Ister  was  born  at  Gyrene,  that  thence  he 
proceeded  with  Callimachus  to  Alexandrea,  and  afterward  lived  for  some 
time  at  Paphos,  which  was  subject  to  the  kings  of  Egypt.2    Ister  is  said 
to  have  been  at  first  a  slave  of  Callimachus,  and  afterward  his  friend, 
and  this  circumstance  determines  his  age,  since  he  accordingly  lived  in 
the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Euergetes,  that  is,  between  about  B.C.  250  and  B.C. 
220.     Ister  was  the  author  of  a  considerable  number  of  works,  all  of 
which  are  lost,  with  the  exception  of  some  fragments.     The  most  im 
portant  of  his  works  was  an  Atf.his  ('Ardis),  or  History  of  Attica,  of  which 
the  sixteenth  book  is  mentioned  by  Harpocration. 

The  fragments  of  Ister  are  given  by  Siebelis,  Fragm.  Phanodemi,  Demon.,  Clitodemi  et 
Istri,  Leipzig,  1812,  8vo,  and  by  C.  and  Th.  Miiller,  in  the  Fragm.  Histor.  Grose.,  vol.  i., 
p.  418,  seqq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Groeca,  Paris,  1841,  8vo. 

X.  POLYBIUS  ( Tlo\6fiios ),3  the  celebrated  historian,  was  a  native  of 
Megalopolis,  in  Arcadia,  and  was  born  about  B.C.  204.     His  father,  Ly- 
cortas,  was  one  of  the  most  distinguished  men  of  the  Achaean  league ; 
and  Polybius  received  the  advantages  of  his  father's  instruction  in  polit 
ical  knowledge  and  the  military  art.     He  must  also  have  reaped  great 
benefit  from  his  intercourse  with  Philopcemen,  who  was  a  friend  of  his 
father's,  and  on  whose  death,  in  B.C.  182,  Polybius  carried  the  urn  in 
which  his  ashes  were  deposited.     In  the  following  year  Polybius  was 
appointed  one  of  the  ambassadors  to  Egypt,  but  he  did  not  leave  Greece, 
as  the  intention  of  sending  an  embassy  was  abandoned.     From  this  time 
he  probably  began  to  take  part  in  public  affairs,  and  he  appears  to  have 
soon  obtained  great  influence  among  his  countrymen.     After  the  con 
quest  of  Macedonia  in  B.C.  168,  the  Roman  commissioners,  who  were 
sent  into  the  south  of  Greece,  commanded,  at  the  instigation  of  Callicra- 
tes,  that  one  thousand  Achaeans  should  be  carried  to  Rome,  to  answer 
the  charge  of  not  having  assisted  the  Romans  against  Perseus.     This 
number  included  all  the  best  and  noblest  part  of  the  nation,  and  among 
them  was  Polybius.     They  arrived  in  Italy  in  B.C.  167,  but,  instead  of 
being  put  upon  their  trial,  they  were  distributed  among  the  Etruscan 
towns. 

Polybius  was  more  fortunate  than  the  rest  of  his  countrymen.  He  had 
probably  become  acquainted  in  Greece  with  ^Emilius  Paulus,  or  his  sons 
Fabius  and  Scipio,  and  the  two  young  men  now  obtained  permission 
from  the  pisetor  for  Polybius  to  reside  at  Rome,  in  the  house  of  their  fa- 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Compare  Pint.,  Quasst.  Gr.,  43,  who  calls  him  an  Alexandrean. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Bioffr.,s.  r. 


392  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ther  Paulus.  Scipio  was  then  eighteen  years  of  age,  and  soon  became 
warmly  attached  to  Polybius.  Scipio  was  accompanied  by  his  friend  in 
all  his  military  expeditions,  and  derived  much  advantage  from  his  expe 
rience  and  knowledge.  Polybius,  on  the  other  hand,  besides  finding  a 
liberal  patron  and  protector  in  Scipio,  was  able  by  his  means  to  obtain 
access  to  public  documents,  and  to  accumulate  materials  for  his  great 
historical  work.1  After  remaining  in  Italy  seventeen  years,  Polybius  re 
turned  to  the  Peloponnesus,  in  B.C.  151,  with  the  surviving  Achsean  ex 
iles,  who  were  at  length  allowed  by  the  Senate  to  revisit  their  native 
land.  He  did  not,  however,  remain  long  in  Greece,  but  joined  Scipio  in 
his  campaign  against  Carthage,  and  was  present  at  the  destruction  of 
that  city,  in  B.C.  146.  Immediately  afterward  he  hurried  to  Greece, 
wrhere  the  Achseans  were  waging  a  mad  and  hopeless  war  against  the 
Romans.  He  appears  to  have  arrived  in  Greece  soon  after  the  capture 
of  Corinth ;  and  he  exerted  all  his  influence  to  alleviate  the  misfortunes 
of  his  countrymen,  and  to  procure  favorable  terms  for  them.  His  grate 
ful  fellow-countrymen  acknowledged  the  great  services  he  had  rendered 
them,  and  statues  were  erected  to  his  honor  at  Megalopolis,  Mantinea, 
Pallantium,  Tegea,  and  other  places.2 

Polybius  seems  now  to  have  devoted  himself  to  the  composition  of  the 
great  historical  work  for  which  he  had  long  been  collecting  materials. 
At  what  period  of  his  life  he  made  the  journeys  into  foreign  countries  for 
the  purpose  of  visiting  the  places  which  he  had  to  describe  in  his  history, 
it  is  impossible  to  determine.  He  tells  us  that  he  undertook  long  and 
dangerous  journeys  into  Africa,  Spain,  Gaul,  and  even  as  far  as  the  At 
lantic,  on  account  of  the  ignorance  which  prevailed  respecting  those 
parts.  Some  of  these  countries  he  visited  while  serving  under  Scipio, 
who  afforded  him  every  facility  for  the  execution  of  his  design.  At  a 
later  period  of  his  life  he  visited  Egypt  likewise.  He  probably  accompa 
nied  Scipio  to  Spain  in  B.C.  134,  and  was  present  at  the  fall  of  Numan- 
tia,  since  Cicero  states  that  Polybius  wrote  a  history  of  the  Numantine 
war.  He  died  at  the  age  of  eighty-two,3  in  consequence  of  a  fall  from 
his  horse,  about  B.C.  122. 

The  history  of  Polybius  consisted  of  forty  books.  It  began  B.C.  220, 
where  the  history  of  Aratus  left  off,  and  ended  at  B.C.  146,  in  which  year 
Corinth  was  destroyed,  and  the  independence  of  Greece  perished.  It 
consisted  of  two  distinct  parts,  which  were  probably  published  at  differ 
ent  times,  and  afterward  united  into  one  work.  The  first  part  comprised 
a  period  of  thirty-five  years,  beginning  with  the  second  Punic  war,  and 
the  Social  war  in  Greece,  and  ending  with  the  overthrow  of  Perseus  and 
the  Macedonian  kingdom,  in  B.C.  168.  This  was,  in  fact,  the  main  por 
tion  of  his  work,  and  its  great  object  was  to  show  how  the  Romans  had, 
in  this  brief  period  of  thirty-five  years,  conquered  the  greater  part  of  the 
world.  But  since  the  Greeks  were  ignorant,  for  the  most  part,  of  the 
early  history  of  Rome,  he  gives  a  survey  of  Roman  history  from  the  tak 
ing  of  the  city  by  the  Gauls  to  the  commencement  of  the  second  Punic 

1  Polyb.,  xxxii.,  9,  seqq. ;  Pausan.,\i\.,  10. 

*  Pa?/sfl».,viii.,  37,  2;  Polyb.,  xl.,  8,  seqq.  3  Lucian,  Macrob.,  23. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  393 

war  in  the  first  two  books,  which  thus  formed  an  introduction  to  the  body 
of  the  work.  With  the  fall  of  the  Macedonian  kingdom  the  supremacy 
of  the  Roman  dominion  was  decided,  and  nothing  more  remained  for  the 
other  nations  of  the  world  than  to  yield  submission  to  the  latter.  The 
second  part  of  the  work,  which  formed  a  kind  of  supplement  to  the  for 
mer  part,  comprised  the  period  from  the  overthrow  of  Perseus,  in  B.C. 
168,  to  the  fall  of  Corinth,  in  B.C.  146.  The  history  of  the  conquest  of 
Greece  seems  to  have  been  completed  in  the  thirty-ninth  book,  and  the 
fortieth  book  probably  contained  a  chronological  summary  of  the  whole 
work.1 

The  history  of  Polybius  is  one  of  the  most  valuable  works  that  has 
come  down  to  us  from  antiquity.  He  had  a  clear  apprehension  of  the 
knowledge  which  a  historian  must  possess  ;  and  his  preparatory  studies 
were  carried  on  with  the  greatest  energy  and  perseverance.  Thus  he 
not  only  collected  with  accuracy  and  care  an  account  of  the  events  that 
he  intended  to  narrate,  but  he  also  studied  the  history  of  the  Roman  con 
stitution,  and  made  distant  journeys  to  become  acquainted  with  the  ge 
ography  of  the  countries  that  he  had  to  describe  in  his  work.  In  addition 
to  this,  he  had  a  strong  judgment  and  a  striking  love  of  truth,  and,  from 
having  himself  taken  an  active  part  in  political  life,  he  was  able  to  judge 
of  the  motives  and  actions  of  the  great  actors  in  history  in  a  way  that  no 
mere  scholar  or  rhetorician  could  possibly  do.  But  the  characteristic 
feature  of  his  work,  and  the  one  which  distinguishes  it  from  all  other  his 
tories  which  have  come  down  to  us  from  antiquity,  is  its  didactic  nature. 
He  did  not,  like  other  historians,  write  to  afford  amusement  to  his  read 
ers  ;  his  object  was  to  teach  by  the  past  a  knowledge  of  the  future,  and 
to  deduce  from  previous  events  lessons  of  practical  wisdom.  Hence  he 
calls  his  work  a  Pragmateia  (Trpay/j.arda),  that  is,  a  systematic  history,  in 
which  events  are  put  together  connectedly,  as  causes  and  effects,  and 
not  merely  a  History  (iVrop/a),  where  they  are  given  in  the  order  of  time.3 
The  value  of  history  consisted,  in  his  opinion,  in  the  instruction  that 
might  be  obtained  from  it.  Thus  the  narrative  of  events  became,  in  his 
view,  of  secondary  importance  ;  they  formed  only  the  text  of  the  political 
and  moral  discourses  which  it  was  the  province  of  the  historian  to  deliver. 

Excellent,  however,  as  these  discourses  are,  they  materially  detract 
from  the  value  of  the  history  as  a  work  of  art.  Their  frequent  occurrence 
interrupts  the  continuity  of  the  narrative,  and  destroys,  to  a  great  extent, 
the  interest  of  the  reader  in  the  scenes  which  are  described.  Moreover, 
he  frequently  inserts  long  episodes  which  have  little  connection  with  the 
main  subject  of  his  work,  because  they  have  a  didactic  tendency.  Thus 
we  find  that  one  whole  book  (the  sixth)  was  devoted  to  a  history  of  the 
Roman  constitution  ;  and  in  the  same  manner  episodes  were  introduced 
even  on  subjects  which  did  not  teach  any  political  or  moral  truths,  but 
simply  because  his  countrymen  entertained  erroneous  opinions  on  those 
subjects.  The  thirty-fourth  book,  for  example,  seems  to  have  been  ex 
clusively  a  treatise  on  geography.  Although  Polybius  was  thus  enabled 
to  impart  much  important  information,  of  which  we  in  modern  times  es- 
1  Smith,  1.  c.  *  Polyb.,  i.,  1,  3  :  iii.,  32. 


394  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

pecially  reap  the  benefit,  still  it  can  not  be  denied  that  such  episodes  are 
no  improvements  to  the  history,  considered  as  a  work  of  art. 

Still,  after  making  these  deductions,  the  great  merits  of  Polybius  re 
main  unimpaired.  His  strict  impartiality,  to  which  he  frequently  lays 
claim,  has  been  generally  admitted  by  both  ancient  and  modern  writers. 
And  it  is  surprising  that  he  displays  such  impartiality  in  his  judgment  of 
the  Romans,  especially  when  we  consider  his  intimate  friendship  with 
Scipio,  and  the  strong  admiration  which  he  evidently  entertained  of  that 
extraordinary  people.  Thus  we  find  him,  for  example,  characterizing  the 
occupation  of  Sardinia  by  the  Romans,  in  the  interval  between  the  first 
and  second  Punic  wars,  as  a  violation  of  all  justice,  and  denouncing  the 
general  corruption  of  the  Roman  generals  from  the  time  of  their  foreign 
conquests,  with  a  few  brilliant  exceptions.  But,  at  the  same  time,  he 
does  not  display  an  equal  impartiality  in  the  history  of  the  Achaean  league  ; 
and,  perhaps,  we  could  hardly  expect  from  him  that  he  should  forget 
that  he  was  a  member  of  it.  He  describes  in  far  too  glowing  colors  the 
character  of  Aratus,  the  great  hero  of  the  Achaean  league,  and  ascribes 
to  the  historical  work  of  this  statesman  a  degree  of  impartiality  to  which 
it  was  certainly  not  entitled.  On  the  same  principle  he  gives  quite  a 
false  impression  of  the  political  life  of  Cleomenes,  simply  because  this 
king  was  the  great  opponent  of  Aratus  and  the  league.  He  was  likewise 
guilty  of  injustice  in  the  views  which  he  gives  of  the  ^Etolians,  in  some 
instances.1 

Livy  did  not  use  Polybius  till  he  came  to  the  second  Punic  war,  but 
from  that  time  he  followed  him  very  closely,  though  without  due  acknowl 
edgment  ;  and  his  history  of  the  events  after  the  termination  of  that  war 
appears  to  be  little  more  than  a  translation  of  his  Grecian  predecessor 
Cicero  likewise  seems  to  have  chiefly  followed  Polybius  in  the  account 
which  he  gives  of  the  Roman  constitution  in  his  De  Republica.  The  his 
tory  of  Polybius  was  continued  by  Posidonius  and  Strabo. 

The  style  of  Polybius  will  not  bear  comparison  with  the  great  masters 
of  Greek  literature  ;  nor  is  it  to  be  expected  that  it  should.  He  lived  at 
a  time  when  the  Greek  language  had  lost  much  of  its  purity  by  an  inter 
mixture  of  foreign  elements,  and  he  did  not  attempt  to  imitate  the  lan 
guage  of  the  great  Attic  writers.  He  wrote  as  he  spoke,  and  had  too 
great  a  contempt  for  rhetorical  embellishments  to  avail  himself  of  them 
in  the  composition  of  his  work.  The  style  of  such  a  man  naturally  bore 
the  impress  of  his  mind ;  and  as  instruction,  and  not  amusement,  was 
the  great  object  for  which  he  wrote,  he  did  not  seek  to  please  his  readers 
by  the  choice  of  his  phrases  or  the  composition  of  his  sentences.  Hence 
the  later  Greek  critics  were  severe  in  their  condemnation  of  his  style, 
and  Dionysius  classes  his  work  with  those  of  Phylarchus  and  Duris,  which 
it  was  impossible  to  read  through  to  the  end.2  But  the  most  striking 
fault  in  the  style  of  Polybius  arises  from  his  want  of  imagination.  Poly 
bius,  with  his  cool,  calm,  calculating  judgment,  was  not  only  destitute  of 
all  imaginative  power,  but  evidently  despised  it  when  he  saw  it  exer- 
cised  by  others.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  his  geographical  descriptions 
i  Smith,  I.  c.  a  Dion.  Hal,  De  Cornp.  Verb.,  c.  4. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  395 

are  so  vague  and  indistinct.  To  this  same  cause,  the  want  of  imagina 
tion  on  the  part  of  Polybius,  we  are  disposed  to  attribute  the  apparent 
indifference  with  which  he  describes  the  fall  of  his  native  country,  and 
the  extinction  of  the  liberties  of  Greece.  He  only  sought  to  relate  facts, 
and  to  draw  the  proper  reflections  from  them  ;  to  relate  them  with  viv 
idness,  and  to  paint  them  in  striking  colors,  was  not  his  calling.1 

The  greater  part  of  the  history  of  Polybius  has  perished.  We  possess 
the  first,  five  books  entire,  but  of  the  rest  we  have  only  fragments  and 
extracts,  of  which  some,  however,  are  of  considerable  length,  such  as  the 
account  of  the  Roman  army,  which  belonged  to  the  sixth  book.  There 
have  been  discovered,  at  different  times,  four  distinct  collections  of  ex 
tracts  from  the  lost  books,  to  which  we  will  refer  more  particularly  in 
the  account  that  follows  of  the  editions  of  Polybius. 

EDITIONS    OK    POLYBIUS. 

The  first  five  books  were  first  printed  in  a  Latin  translation,  executed  by  Perotti,  and 
issued  from  the  celebrated  press  of  Sweynheym  and  Pannartz,  Rome,  1473,  foL  The  first 
part  of  the  work  of  Polybius,  which  was  printed  in  Greek,  was  the  treatise  on  the  Roman 
army,  which  was  published  by  Ant.  de  Sabio,  Venice,  1529, 4to,  with  a  Latin  translation 
by  Lascaris  ;  and  in  the  following  year,  1530,  the  Greek  text  of  the  first  five  books,  with 
the  translation  of  Perotti,  appeared  at  Hagenau,  edited  by  Obsopaeus,  but  without  the 
treatise  on  the  Roman  army,  which  had  probably  not  yet  found  its  way  across  the  Alps. 
A  few  years  afterward,  a  discovery  was  made  of  some  extracts  from  the  other  books  of 
Polybius,  but  the  author  of  the  compilation,  and  the  time  at  which  it  was  drawn  up,  are 
unknown.  These  extracts  contain  the  greater  part  of  the  sixth  book,  and  portions  of 
the  following  eleven  (vii.-xvii.).  The  manuscript  containing  them  was  brought  from 
Corfu,  and  they  were  published,  together  with  the  first  five  books,  which  had  already  ap 
peared,  at  Basle,  1549,  fol.,from  the  press  of  Hervagius.  The  Latin  translation  of  these 
extracts  was  executed  by  Wolfgang  Musculus,  who  also  corrected  Perotti's  version  of  the 
other  books,  and  the  editing  of  the  Greek  text  was  superintended  by  Arlenius.  A  por 
tion  of  these  extracts,  namely,  a  description  of  the  naval  battle  fought  between  Philippus 
and  Attains  and  the  Rhodians,  belonging  to  the  sixteenth  book,  had  been  previously  pub 
lished  by  Bayf,  in  his  De  Re  Navali  Veterum,  Paris,  1536,  reprinted  at  Basle,  1537. 

In  1582,  Ursinus  published  at  Antwerp,  in  4to,  a  second  collection  of  extracts  from 
Polybius,  entitled  Excerpta  de  Legationibus  ('E(cA.oya!  jrepl  npea/Seuoi/),  which  were  made 
in  the  tenth  century  of  the  Christian  era,  by  order  of  the  Emperor  Constantinus  Porphy- 
rogenitus.  These  excerpta  are  taken  from  various  authors,  but  the  most  important  of 
them  came  from  Polybius.  In  1609,  Is.  Casaubon  published  at  Paris,  in  folio,  his  excel 
lent  edition  of  Polybius,  in  which  he  incorporated  all  the  excerpta  and  fragments  that 
had  hitherto  been  discovered,  and  added  a  new  Latin  version.  He  intended,  likewise, 
to  write  a  commentary  upon  the  author,  but  he  did  not  proceed  farther  than  the  twentieth 
chapter  of  the  first  book.  This  portion  of  his  commentary  was  published,  after  his  death, 
at  Paris,  1617,  8vo.  A  farther  addition  was  made  to  the  fragments  of  Polybius  by  Vale 
sius,  who  published,  in  1634,  another  portion  of  the  excerpta  of  Constantinus,  entitled 
Excerpta  de  Virtutibus  et  Vitiis  (nepl  aperijs  /cal  /ccua'as),  containing  extracts  from  Poly 
bius,  Diodorus  Siculus,  and  other  writers  ;  and  to  this  collection  Valesius  added  several 
fragments  of  Polybius,  gathered  together  from  various  writers.  Gronovius  undertook  a 
new  edition  of  Polybius,  which  appeared  at  Amsterdam  in  1670,  in  3  vols.  8vo.  The  text 
of  this  edition  is  taken  almost  verbatim  from  Casaubon's,  but  the  editor  added,  besides 
the  extracts  of  Valesius,  and  the  commentary  of  Casaubon  on  the  first  twenty  chapters 
of  the  first  book,  many  additional  notes  by  Casaubon,  which  had  been  collected  from  his 
papers  by  his  son,  Meric  Casaubon,  and  likewise  notes  by  Gronovius  himself.  The  edi 
tion  of  Gronovius  was  reprinted  under  the  care  of  Ernesti,  at  Leipzig,  1763-64,  3  vola. 
8vo,  with  a  Glossarium  Polybianum.  The  next  edition  is  that  of  Schweighaeuser,  which 


396  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

surpassed  all  the  preceding  ones.  It  was  published  at  Leipzig,  1789-95,  in  8  vols.  8vo, 
of  which  the  first  four  contain  the  Greek  text,  with  a  Latin  translation,  and  the  other 
volumes  a  commentary,  an  historical  and  geographical  index,  and  a  copious  "  Lexicon 
Polybianum,"  which  is  almost  indispensable  to  the  student.  Schweighaeuser's  edition 
was  reprinted  at  Oxford  in  1823,  in  5  vols.  8vo,  without  the  commentary,  but  with  the 
lexicon. 

From  the  time  of  Valesius  no  new  additions  were  made  to  the  fragments  of  Polybius, 
with  the  exception  of  a  fragment  describing  the  siege  of  Ambracia,  originally  published 
in  the  second  volume  of  Gronovius's  Livy,  until  Angelo  Mai  discovered,  in  the  Vatican 
library  at  Rome,  the  third  section  of  the  Excerpta  of  Constantinus  Porphyrogenitus,  en 
titled  Excerpta  de  sententiis  (vrcpl  yvia^lav) ,  which,  among  other  extracts,  contained  a  con 
siderable  number  from  the  history  of  Polybius.  These  excerpta  were  published  by  Mai 
in  the  second  volume  of  his  Scriptorum  veterum  nova  collectio,  Rome,  1827  ;  but  in  con 
sequence  of  the  mutilated  state  of  the  manuscript  from  which  they  were  taken,  many  of 
them  are  unintelligible.  Some  of  the  errors  in  Mai's  edition  are  corrected  in  the  reprints 
of  the  Excerpta  published  by  Geel,  at  Leyden,  and  by  Lucht,  at  Altona,  in  1830  ;  but  these 
Excerpta  appear  in  a  far  more  correct  form  in  the  edition  of  Heyse,  Berlin,  1846,  since 
Heyse  collated  the  manuscript  afresh  with  great  care  and  accuracy.  The  latest  editions 
of  Polybius  are  that  of  Bekker,  Berlin,  1844,  2  vols.  8vo,  who  has  added  the  Vatican  frag 
ments,  and  that  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grosca,  Paris,  1839,  royal  8vo. 

Besides  the  great  historical  work  of  which  we  have  been  speaking, 
Polybius  wrote,  2.  The  Life  of  Philopcemen,  in  three  books,  to  which  he 
himself  refers.1  3.  A  Treatise  on  Tactics  (TO.  irepl  ras  Ta£eis  uTro^vrj^ara), 
which  he  also  quotes,2  and  to  which  Arrian  and  ^Elian  allude.  4.  A  His 
tory  of  the  Numantine  War,  according  to  the  statement  of  Cicero  ;3  and,  5. 
A  small  treatise,  De  Habitatione  sub  JEquatorc  (irepl  TTJS  Trepi  r'bv  'Ifftifj.^iv'bv 
oiKTicrecas),  quoted  by  Geminus  ;4  but  it  is  not  improbable  that  this  formed 
part  of  the  thirty-fourth  book  of  the  history,  which  was  entirely  devoted 
to  geography. 

XI.  APOLLODORUS  ( 'A7roAA^5copos  ),5  a  Greek  grammarian  of  Athens, 
nourished  about  B.C.  140,  a  few  years  after  the  fall  of  Corinth.  Further 
particulars  are  not  mentioned  respecting  him.  We  know  that  one  of  his 
historical  works  (the  Xpovind)  came  down  to  the  year  B.C.  143,  and  that 
it  was  dedicated  to  Attalus  II.,  surnamed  Philadelphus,  who  died  in  B.C. 
138  ;  but  how  long  Apollodorus  lived  after  the  year  B.C.  143,  is  unknown. 
He  wrote  a  great  number  of  works,  and  on  a  variety  of  subjects,  which 
were  much  used  in  antiquity  ;  but  all  of  them  have  perished,  with  the  ex 
ception  of  one,  and  even  this  one  has  not  come  down  to  us  complete.  This 
work  bears  the  title  of  BifihioO-fjKr].  It  consists  of  three  books,  and  is  by 
far  the  best  among  the  extant  works  of  the  kind.  It  contains  a  well-ar 
ranged  account  of  the  numerous  mythi  connected  with  the  mythological 
and  the  heroic  ages  of  Greece.  The  materials  are  derived  from  the 
poets,  especially  the  cyclic  poets,  the  logographers,  and  the  historians. 
It  begins  with  the  origin  of  the  gods,  and  goes  down  to  the  time  of  Thes 
eus,  when  the  work  suddenly  breaks  off.  The  part  which  is  wanting  at 
the  end  contained  the  stories  of  the  families  of  Pelops  and  Atreus,  and 
probably  the  whole  of  the  Trojan  cycle  also.  The  first  portion  of  the 
work  (i.,  1-7)  contains  the  ancient  theogonic  and  cosmogonic  mythi, 
which  are  followed  by  the  Hellenic  mythi,  the  latter  being  arranged  ac- 

i  Polyb.,  x.,24.  2/d.,  ix.,  20.  3  Ep.  ad  Fam.,  v.,  12. 

4  Gem.t  c.  13  ;  Petav.  Uranolog.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  31,  scqq.          5  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  397 

cording  to  the  different  tribes  of  the  Greek  nation.  The  ancients  valued 
this  work  very  highly,  as  it  formed  a  running  mythological  commentary 
on  the  Greek  poets.  To  us  it  is  of  still  greater  value,  as  most  of  the 
works  from  which  Apollodorus  derived  his  information,  as  well  as  sev 
eral  other  works,  which  were  akin  to  that  of  Apollodorus,  are  now  lost. 
Apollodorus  relates  his  mythical  stories  in  a  plain  and  unadorned  style, 
and  gives  only  that  which  he  found  in  his  sources,  without  interpolating 
or  perverting  the  genuine  forms  of  the  legends  by  attempts  to  explain 
their  meaning.  This  extreme  simplicity  of  the  Bibliotheca,  more  like  a 
mere  catalogue  of  events  than  a  history,  has  led  some  modern  critics  to 
consider  the  work,  in  its  present  form,  either  as  an  abridgment  of  some 
larger  work  of  Apollodorus,  or  as  made  up  out  of  several  of  his  works. 
But  this  opinion  is  a  mere  hypothesis  without  any  evidence. 

Of  the  other  works  ascribed  to  Apollodorus  a  considerable  number  of 
fragments  remain.  The  most  deserving  of  notice  among  these  works  are, 
1.  Trjs  irepioSos,  /cw/xi/cy  (j-frpcf,  already  mentioned  under  the  head  of  didactic 
poets  who  were  not  epic.  2.  XpoviKd,  similarly  mentioned.  3.  Tlepl  'Em- 
xdppov,  either  a  commentary  or  a  dissertation  on  the  plays  of  the  comic 
poet  Epicharmus,  consisting  of  ten  books.1  4.  Ilepl  yew  Kara\6yov,  or 
irepl  j/ewi/,  an  historical  and  geographical  explanation  of  the  catalogue  in 
the  second  book  of  the  Iliad.  It  consisted  of  twelve  books,  and  is  fre 
quently  cited  by  Strabo  and  other  ancient  writers.  5.  Uepl  Zfypovos,  a 
commentary  on  the  mimes  of  Sophron. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Bibliotheca,  in  which  the  text  is  in  a  very  bad  condition,  is  by 
Benedictus  aEgius,  at  Rome,  1555,  8vo,  A  somewhat  better  edition  is  that  published  at 
Heidelberg  by  Commelin,  1599,  8vo,  with  a  more  correct  text.  After  various  other  edi 
tions,  among  which  we  need  mention  only  those  of  Tanaquil  Faber,  Paris,  1661,  8vo, 
and  Gale,  in  his  collection  of  the  "  Scriptores  Histories  Poeticae,"  Paris,  1675,  8vo,  there 
followed  the  first  critical  edition,  by  Heyne,  Giittingen,  1782-83, 4  vols.  12mo,  of  which  a 
second  and  improved  edition  appeared  in  1803,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  best  among  the  subse 
quent  editions  are  those  of  Clavier,  Paris,  1805,  2  vols.  8vo,  with  a  learned  introduction, 
a  commentary,  and  a  French  translation  ;  of  C.  and  Th.  Miiller,  in  the  Fragm.  Histor. 
Grac.,  vol.  i.,  p.  104,  seqq.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  Paris,  1841 ;  and  of  Westermann, 
in  his  Mythographi,  sive  Scriptores  Poeticas  Histor.  Grceci,  p.  459,  seqq.,  Braunschweig 
1843,  8vo. 


CHAPTER  XL. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD— continued. 
GEOGRAPHICAL     WR.ITERS. 

I.  GEOGRAPHY  was  one  of  the  branches  of  knowledge  which  made  most 
progress  during  the  period  under  review.     The  conquests  of  Alexander, 
which  opened  Upper  Asia  and  India  to  the  Greeks,  and  the  maritime  en 
terprises  of  the  Ptolemies,  brought  into  notice  communities  whose  very 
existence  before  this  had  been  hardly  even  suspected. 

II.  The  most  important  geographical  writers  of  this  period  were  Dica- 
archus,  Megasthenes,  Daimachus,  Timosthenes,  Eratosthenes,  and  Polemo. 

1.  DicvEARCHus  (At/campxoy),3  a  celebrated  Peripatetic  philosopher,  ge- 
1  Porphyr.,  Vit.  Plotin.,  4.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


398  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ographer,  and  historian,  was  born  at  Messana,  in  Sicily,  though  he  passed 
the  greater  part  of  his  life  in  Greece  Proper,  and  especially  in  the  Pelo 
ponnesus.  He  was  a  contemporary  of  Aristotle1  and  Theophrastus,  a 
disciple  of  the  former  and  a  friend  of  the  latter,  to  whom  he  dedicated 
some  of  his  writings.  From  some  allusions  that  we  meet  with  in  the 
fragments  of  his  works,  we  must  conclude  that  he  survived  the  year  B.C. 
296,  and  that  he  died  about  B.C.  285.  Dicsearchus  was  highly  esteemed 
by  the  ancients  as  a  philosopher,  and  as  a  man  of  most  extensive  inform 
ation  upon  a  great  variety  of  things.2  His  works,  which  were  very  nu 
merous,  are  frequently  referred  to,  and  many  fragments  of  them  are  still 
extant,  which  show  that  their  loss  is  one  of  the  most  severe  in  Greek 
literature.  His  works  were  partly  geographical,  partly  political  or  his 
torical,  and  partly  philosophical ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  draw  up  an  accurate 
list  of  them,  since  many  which  are  quoted  as  distinct  works  appear  to 
have  been  only  sections  of  greater  ones.  The  fragments  extant,  more 
over,  do  not  always  enable  us  to  form  a  clear  notion  of  the  works  to 
which  they  once  belonged. 

Among  his  geographical  works  may  be  mentioned,  1.  On  the  heights 
of  mountains.3  Suidas  mentions  KaTa^rp^aeis  T&V  sv  TlzXoirovvhaq  6p£>v, 
but  the  quotations  in  Pliny  and  Geminus  show  that  Dicaearchus's  meas 
urements  of  heights  were  not  confined  to  the  Peloponnesus,  and  Suidas 
therefore  probably  quotes  only  a  section  of  the  whole  work.  2.  rfjs  nepi- 
oSos.*  This  work  was  probably  the  text  written  in  explanation  of  the 
geographical  maps  which  Dicaearchus  had  constructed  and  given  to  The 
ophrastus,  and  which  seem  to  have  comprised  the  whole  world,  as  far  as 
it  was  then  known.  3.  'Avaypa^  rf/s  'EAAaSos.  A  work  with  this  title, 
dedicated  to  Theophrastus,  and  consisting  of  150  iambic  verses,  is  still 
extant  under  the  name  of  Dicaearchus,  but  its  form  and  spirit  are  both 
unworthy  of  him,  and  it  is  in  all  probability  the  production  of  a  much 
later  writer,  who  made  a  metrical  paraphrase  of  that  portion  of  the  r?js 
TrepioSos  which  referred  to  Greece.  Buttmann  is  the  only  modern  critic 
who  has  endeavored  to  claim  the  work  for  Dicaearchus,  in  his  "  De  Vica- 
archo  ejusque  operibus  qua  inscribuntur  Bios  TTJS  'EAAaSos  et  'AvaypcupT)  TTJS 
'EAAaSos,"  Naumburg,  1832,  4to.  But  his  attempt  is  not  very  successful, 
and  has  been  ably  refuted  by  Osann.8  4.  Bios  TTJS  'EAAaSos.  This  was  the 
most  important  among  the  works  of  Dicaearchus,  and  comprised  an  ac 
count  of  the  geographical  position,  the  history,  and  the  moral  and  relig 
ious  condition  of  Greece.  It  contained,  in  short,  all  the  information 
necessary  to  obtain  a  full  knowledge  of  the  Greeks,  their  life,  and  their 
manners.  It  was  probably  divided  into  sections  ;  so  that  when  we  read 
of  works  of  Dicaearchus  Trept  juovo-i/cfjs,  irepl  /JLOVVIKUV  ayiavcav,  and  the  like, 
we  have  probably  to  consider  them  only  as  portions  of  the  great  work, 
Bios  TVJS  'EAAaSos.  This  work  consisted  of  three  books.  5.  CH  els  TpoQw- 
lov  Kardftaa-ts.  An  account  of  the  degenerate  and  licentious  proceedings 
of  the  priests  in  the  cave  of  Trophonius.  The  geographical  works  of 
Dicaearchus  were,  according  to  Strabo,  censured  in  many  respects  by 

~i  Cic.~De.Leg.,  iii.,6.       2  Id.,  Tusc.,  i.,  18  ;~Z>7ojf.,  ii.,  5.       3  Plin.,  H.  N.,  ii~65T 
*  Lydus,  De  Mens.,  p  98,  17,  ed,  Bekkfr.      s  Altgem.  Schulzeitung  for  1833,  No.  140. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  399 

Polybius  ;  and  Strabo  himself  is  dissatisfied  with  his  descriptions  of  West 
ern  and  Northern  Europe,  which  countries  Dicaearchus  had  never  visited. 

Among  his  philosophical  works  may  be  mentioned,  1.  Aeo-jSjcwcof,  in  three 
books,  which  derived  its  name  from  the  circumstance  that  the  scene  of 
the  philosophical  dialogue  described  in  it  was  laid  at  Mytilene,  in  Lesbos. 
In  it  Dicaearchus  endeavored  to  prove  that  the  soul  was  mortal.  Cicero 
refers  to  it  in  his  Tusculan  Disputations.  2.  Kopiveuucol.  This  likewise 
consisted  of  three  books,  and  was  a  sort  of  supplement  to  the  preceding 
one.  It  is  probably  the  same  work  which  Cicero,  on  one  occasion,  calls 
"  De  interitu  hominum," 

The  fragments  of  Dicaearchus  have  been  collected  and  accompanied  by  a  very  inter 
esting  discussion  by  Fuhr,  "  Dic&archi  Messenii  qua  supersunt,  composita,  edita  et  illus- 
trata,"  Darmstadt,  1841,  4to.  There  is  also  a  valuable  dissertation  on  the  writings  of 
Dicaearchus,  by  Osann,  in  the  Allgem.  Schulzeitung  for  1833,  No.  140.  The  geographical 
fragments  are  contained  in  Gail's  Geographi  Graeci,  vol.  ii. 

2.  MEGASTHENES  (Meyao-fleVTjs),1  a  Greek  writer,  to  whom  the  subse 
quent  Greek  writers  were  chiefly  indebted  for  their  accounts  of  India. 
Megasthenes  was  a  friend  and  companion  of  Seleucus  Nicator,2  and  was 
sent  by  that  monarch  as  ambassador  to  Sandrocottus,  king  of  the  Prasii, 
whose  capital  was  Palibothra,  a  town,  probably,  near  the  confluence  of 
the  Ganges  and  Sone,  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  modern  Patna.3  We 
know  nothing  more  respecting  the  personal  history  of  Megasthenes,  ex 
cept  the  statement  of  Arrian,  that  he  lived  with  Sibyrtius,  the  satrap  of 
Arachosia,  who  obtained  the  satrapies  of  Arachosia  and  Gedrosia  in  B.C. 
323.  The  time  at  which  he  was  sent  to  Sandrocottus,  and  the  reason 
for  which  he  was  sent,  are  equally  uncertain.  Clinton*  places  the  em 
bassy  a  little  before  B.C.  302,  since  it  was  about  this  time  that  Seleucus 
concluded  an  alliance  with  Sandrocottus  ;  but  it  is  nowhere  stated  that  it 
was  through  the  means  of  Megasthenes  that  the  alliance  was  concluded  ; 
and  as  the  latter  resided  some  time  at  the  court  of  Sandrocottus,  he  may 
have  been  sent  into  India  at  a  subsequent  period.  Since,  however,  San 
drocottus  died  in  B.C.  288,  the  mission  of  Megasthenes  must  be  placed 
previous  to  that  year.  We  have  more  certain  information,  however,  re 
specting  the  parts  of  India  which  Megasthenes  visited.  He  entered  the 
country  through  the  district  of  the  Pentapotamia,  of  the  rivers  of  which 
he  gave  a  full  account ;  and  proceeded  thence  by  the  royal  road  to  Pali 
bothra,  but  appears  not  to  have  visited  any  other  parts  of  India.  Most 
modern  writers,  from  the  time  of  Robertson,  have  supposed,  from  a  pas 
sage  of  Arrian5  (TroAActas  Se  Ae'yet  [Meyoo-fleVTjs]  a(f)iK€<r6ai  Trapa  2,av8p6itoT- 
TOV  rbv  'Ii/Swj'  jSao-iAe'a),  that  Megasthenes  paid  several  visits  to  India  ;  but 
since  neither  Megasthenes  himself  nor  any  other  writer  alludes  to  more 
than  one  visit,  these  words  may  simply  mean  that  he  had  several  inter 
views  with  Sandrocottus  during  his  residence  in  the  country. 

The  work  of  Megasthenes  was  entitled  T&  "ivStKti,  and  was  probably  di 
vided  into  four  books.6  It  appears  to  have  been  written  in  the  Attic  dia 
lect,  and  not  in  the  Ionic,  as  some  modern  writers  have  asserted.  Me- 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  clem.  Alex.,  Stnm.,  i.,  p.  305,  D. 

3  Strab.,  ii.,  p.  70 ;  xv.,  p.  702.  *  Fast.  Hell.,  vol.  lii.,  p.  482,  note. 

6  Anab.,  v.,  6.  e  Atficn.,  iv.,  p.  153,  E. 


400  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

gasthenes  is  repeatedly  referred  to  by  Arrian,  Strabo,  Diodorus,  and 
Pliny.  Of  these  writers,  Arrian,  on  whose  judgment  most  reliance  is  to 
be  placed,  speaks  most  highly  of  Megasthenes,  but  Strabo  and  Pliny  treat 
him  with  less  respect.  Although  his  work  contained  many  fabulous  sto 
ries,  similar  to  those  which  we  find  in  the  Indica  of  Ctesias,  yet  these 
tales  appear  not  to  have  been  fabrications  of  Megasthenes,  but  accounts 
which  he  received  from  the  natives,  frequently  containing,  as  modern 
writers  have  shown,  real  truth,  though  disguised  by  popular  legends  and 
fancy.  There  is  every  reason  for  believing  that  Megasthenes  gave  a 
faithful  account  of  every  thing  that  fell  under  his  own  observation  ;  and 
the  picture  which  he  presents  of  Indian  manners  and  institutions  is,  upon 
the  whole,  more  correct  than  might  have  been  expected.  Every  thing 
that  is  known  respecting  Megasthenes  and  his  work  is  collected  with 
great  diligence  by  Schwanbeck,  Bonn,  1846,  8vo.  The  fragments  are  also 
given  by  C.  Muller,  in  the  Fragm.  Histor.  Grcec.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  397,  seqq.,  in 
Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graca,  Paris,  1848. 

3.  DAIMACHUS  (Aafyiaxos),  or  DEIMACHUS  (Arji/xaxos),1  a  Greek  geograph 
ical  and  historical  writer,  a  native  of  Platsese,  whose  age  is  determined  by 
the  fact  that  he  was  sent  as  ambassador  to  Allitrochades,  the  son  of  San- 
drocottus,  king  of  the  Prasii,2  which  latter  died  in  B.C.  288. 3    He  wrote  a 
work  on  India,  consisting  of  at  least  two  books,  having  probably  acquired, 
or  at.  least  increased,  his  knowledge  of  those  Eastern  countries  during 
his  embassy.     Strabo,  nevertheless,  places  him  at  the  head  of  those  who 
had  circulated  false  or  fabulous  accounts  respecting  India.     We  have  also 
mention  of  a  very  extensive  work  on  sieges  (Tlo\iopKr)TiKa  inro^vri^aTa), 
by  one  Daimachus,  who  is  probably  the  same  as  the  author  of  the  Indica. 
The  work  on  India  is  lost,  but  the  one  on  sieges  may  possibly  be  still 
concealed  somewhere,  since  Magirus  (in  Grater's  Fax  Artium,  p.  1330) 
states  that  he  saw  a  MS.  of  it.     The  fragments  of  Daimachus  are  given 
by  C.  Muller,  in  the  Fragm.  Histor.  Grac.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  440,  seqq.,  in  Didot's 
Bibliotheca  Graca,  Paris,  1848. 

4.  TIMOSTHENES  (TLfj.oardfvr]s),  a  native  of  Rhodes,  was  admiral  of  the 
fleet  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  who  reigned  from  B.C.  285  to  247.     He 
may,  therefore,  be  placed  about  B.C.  282.     He  wrote  a  work  on  harbors 
(irepl  Ki^fvuv},  in  ten  books,  which  was  copied  by  Eratosthenes,  and  which 
is  frequently  cited  by  the  ancient  writers.*    We  have  no  remains. 

5.  ERATOSTHENES  ('EpaToo-fleVTjs),5  a  native  of  Gyrene,  was  born  B.C. 
276.     He  first  studied  in  his  native  city,  and  then  at  Athens.     He  was 
taught  by  Ariston  of  Chios,  the  philosopher ;  Lysanias  of  Gyrene,  the 
grammarian  ;  and  Callimachus,  the  poet.     He  left  Athens  at  the  invita 
tion  of  Ptolemy  Euergetes,  who  placed  him  over  the  library  at  Alexan- 
drea.     Here  he  continued  till  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Epiphanes.     He  died 
at  the  age  of  eighty,  about  B.C.  196,  of  voluntary  starvation,  having  lost 
his  sight,  and  being  tired  of  life.     He  was  a  man  of  very  extensive  learn 
ing,  and  wrote  on  almost  all  the  branches  of  knowledge  then  cultivated 
—geography,  astronomy,  geometry,  philosophy,  history,  and  grammar. 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Strab.,  ii.,  p.  70.  3  Justin.,  xv.,  4, 

*  Strab.,  ix.,  p.  421  ;  Steph.  Byz.,  s.  v.  'Ayaflrj.  5  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  401 

His  merits  as  an  astronomer  and  geometer  will  be  considered  under  a 
subsequent  head  ;  we  will  confine  ourselves  at  present  to  what  he  did  for 
geography,  which  was  closely  connected  with  his  mathematical  pursuits, 
It  was  Eratosthenes  who  raised  geography  to  the  rank  of  a  science  ;  for, 
previous  to  his  time,  it  seems  to  have  consisted  more  or  less  of  a  mass 
of  information  scattered  in  books  of  travel,  descriptions  of  particular 
countries,  and  the  like.  All  these  treasures  were  accessible  to  Eratos 
thenes  in  the  libraries  of  Alexandrea,  and  he  made  the  most  profitable 
use  of  them,  by  collecting  the  scattered  materials,  and  uniting  them  into 
an  organic  system  of  geography  in  his  comprehensive  work  entitled  Tew- 
or,  as  it  is  some  times,  but  erroneously,  called,  re&rypcu/jofyieva,  or 


This  work  consisted  of  three  books.  The  first  book,  which  formed  a 
sort  of  introduction,  contained  a  critical  review  of  the  labors  of  his  prede 
cessors  from  the  earliest  to  his  own  times,  and  investigations  concerning 
the  form  and  nature  of  the  earth,  which,  according  to  him,  was  an  im 
movable  globe.  The  second  book  contained  what  is  now  called  mathe 
matical  geography.  He  was  the  first  person  who  attempted  to  measure 
the  magnitude  of  the  earth,  in  which  attempt  he  brought  forward  and 
used  the  method  which  is  employed  to  the  present  day.  The  third  book 
contained  political  geography,  and  gave  descriptions  of  the  various  coun 
tries,  derived  from  the  works  of  earlier  travellers  and  geographers.  In 
order  to  be  able  to  determine  the  accurate  site  of  each  place,  he  drew  a 
line  parallel  with  the  equator,  running  from  the  Pillars  of  Hercules  to 
the  extreme  east  of  Asia,  and  dividing  the  whole  of  the  inhabited  earth 
into  two  halves.  Connected  with  this  work  was  a  new  map  of  the  earth, 
in  which  towns,  mountains,  rivers,  lakes,  and  climates  were  marked  ac 
cording  to  his  own  improved  measurements.  This  important  work  of 
Eratosthenes  forms  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  ancient  geography.  Stra- 
bo,  as  well  as  other  writers,  made  great  use  of  it.  Unfortunately,  how 
ever,  it  is  lost,  and  all  that  has  survived  consists  of  fragments  quoted  by 
later  geographers  and  historians,  such  as  Polybius,  Strabo,  Marcianus, 
Pliny,  and  others,  who  often  judge  of  him  unfavorably,  and  controvert 
his  statements  ;  while  it  can  be  proved  that,  in  a  great  many  passages, 
they  adopt  his  opinions  without  mentioning  his  name.  Marcianus  charg 
es  Eratosthenes  with  having  copied  the  substance  of  the  work  of  Timos- 
thenes  on  harbors,  to  which  he  added  but  very  little  of  his  own.  This 
charge  may  be  well-founded,  but  can  not  have  diminished  the  value  of 
the  work  of  Eratosthenes,  in  which  that  of  Timosthenes  can  have  formed 
only  a  very  small  portion.  It  seems  to  have  been  the  very  overwhelm 
ing  importance  of  the  geography  of  Eratosthenes  that  called  forth  a  num 
ber  of  opponents.2 

Another  work  of  a  somewhat  similar  nature,  entitled  'Ep/iifc,  was  written 
in  verse,  and  treated  of  the  form  of  the  earth,  its  temperature,  the  differ 
ent  zones,  the  constellations,  and  the  like.3  Another  poem,  'Hpry^/Tj,  is 
mentioned  witli  great  commendation  by  Longinus.4  Eratosthenes  distin- 

1  Strab.,  i.,  p.  29;  ii.,  p.  67  ;  xv.,  p.  688  2  Smith,  I.  c. 

3  Bernhardy,  Eratosthenica,  p,  110,  seqq.  4  De  Sublim.,  33,  5. 


402  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

guished  himself  also  as  a  philosopher,  historian,  and  grammarian.  His 
acquirements  as  a  philosopher  are  attested  by  the  works  which  are  at 
tributed  to  him.  His  historical  productions  were  closely  connected  with 
his  mathematical  pursuits.  There  was  also  a  very  important  chronolog 
ical  work  of  his,  entitled  Xpovoypa<pla  or  Xpovoypatyi&v,  in  which  he  en 
deavored  to  fix  the  dates  of  all  the  important  events  in  literary  as  well 
as  political  history.1  This  work,  of  which  some  fragments  are  still  extant, 
formed  a  comprehensive  chronological  history,  and  appears  to  have  been 
held  in  high  esteem  by  the  ancients.  Another  work,  likewise  of  a  chron 
ological  kind,  was  the  'OAv^Tnoj/ikat,2  containing  a  chronological  list  of 
the  victors  in  the  Olympic  games,  and  other  things  connected  with  them. 
Among  the  grammatical  works  of  Eratosthenes  we  may  mention  that 
On  the  Old  Attic  Comedy  (Uepl  TTJS  'Apxaias  Kco/jupSias),  a  very  extensive 
work,  of  which  the  twelfth  book  is  quoted,  and  which  contained  every 
thing  that  was  necessary  to  arrive  at  a  perfect  understanding  of  those 
poetical  productions.  We  still  possess  a  considerable  number  of  frag 
ments  of  this  work,  and  from  what  he  says  about  Aristophanes,  it  is  ev 
ident  that  his  judgment  was  as  sound  as  his  information  was  extensive. 

The  fragments  of  the  Geography  of  Eratosthenes  were  first  collected  by  Ancher,  Dia 
tribe  in  Fragm.  Geograph.  Eratosth.,  Gottingen,  1770,  4to,  and  afterward  by  Seidel,  Era- 
tosth.  Geograph.  Fragm.,  Gottingen,  1789,  8vo.  The  best  collection,  however,  of  all  the 
fragments  and  remains  of  Eratosthenes,  is  that  by  Bernhardy,  Eratosthenica,  Berlin, 
1822,  8vo.  The  chronological  fragments  are  best  given  by  C.  Miiller,  at  the  end  of  He 
rodotus,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grceca,  Paris,  1844. 


6.  POLEMO  (rioA.e'jUtti/),3  by  citizenship  of  Athens,  but  by  birth  either  of 
Ilium,  or  Samos,  or  Sicyon,  a  Stoic  philosopher  and  an  eminent  geogra 
pher.  He  was  surnamed  5  Trepir)yr]T-f)s,  and  was  a  contemporary  of  Aris 
tophanes  of  Byzantium,  in  the  time  of  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  at  the  begin 
ning  of  the  second  century  B.C.*  In  philosophy  he  was  a  disciple  of 
Panaetius.  He  made  extensive  journeys  through  Greece  to  collect  mate 
rials  for  his  geographical  works,  in  the  course  of  which  he  paid  particular 
attention  to  the  inscriptions  on  votive  offerings  and  on  columns,  whence 
he  obtained  the  name  of  SrTjAo/coVas5  (a  sort  of  Old  Mortality).  As  the 
collector  of  these  inscriptions,  he  was  one  of  the  earlier  contributors  to 
the  Greek  Anthology,  and  he  wrote  a  work  expressly,  irepi  ra>v  /car&  ir6\eis 
eiriypawdTw.6  Athenaeus  and  other  writers  make  very  numerous  quota 
tions  from  his  various  works,  the  titles  of  which  it  is  unnecessary  to  give 
at  length.  They  are  chiefly  descriptions  of  different  parts  of  Greece  ; 
some  are  on  the  paintings  preserved  in  various  places,  and  several  are 
controversial,  among  which  is  one  against  Eratosthenes. 

The  fragments  of  Polemo  have  been  published  by  Preller,  "  Polemonis  Periegetce  Frag- 
menta,  colfegit,  digessit,  notis  auxit  L.  Preller,"  Leipzig,  1838,  8vo.  For  farther  informa 
tion  respecting  Polemo,  consult  Vossius,  De  Hist.  Gr&c.,  p.  159,  seqq.,  ed.  West  ermann  ; 
and  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell.,  vol.  hi.,  p.  524,  where  a  list  of  his  works  is  given. 

1  Harpocrat.,  s.  v.  EVJJI/OS;  Dion.  Hal.,  i.,  40.  2  Diog.  Laert.,  viii.,  51. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Suid.,  s.  v.;  Athen.,  vi.,  p.  234 

5  Athen.,  I.  c.  6  Id.,  x.,  p.  430.  /);  412,  E. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  403 


CHAPTER  XLI. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD— continued. 
PHILOSOPHY. 

I.  IN  considering  the  philosophy  of  the  Alexandrine  period,  our  atten 
tion  will  be  confined  to  the  Middle  and  the  New  Academy,  and  to  the  later 
Stoics,  Diogenes  of  Babylon,  Pan&tius,  and  Posidonius.     The  New  Platonic 
school  will  fall  under  the  Roman  period. 

II.  The  leading  distinction  between  the  Old  and  the  Middle  Academy 
was,  as  we  have  already  said,  that  the  latter  brought  in  the  skeptical  doc 
trine  of  the  uncertainty  of  human  knowledge,  and  taught  that  every  thing  is 
uncertain  to  the  human  understanding,  and  that  all  confident  assertions 
are  unreasonable.     The  New  Academy,  on  the  other  hand,  softened  down 
this  bold  skepticism,  and  introduced  what  has  been  termed  the  doctrine 
of  probabilities ;  namely,  that  although  the  senses,  the  understanding,  and 
the  imagination  frequently  deceive  us,  and  therefore  can  not  be  infallible 
judges  of  truth,  still  that,  from  the  impressions  which  we  perceive  to  be 
produced  on  the  mind  by  means  of  the  senses,  we  infer  appearances  of 
truth,  or  probabilities. 

I.    MIDDLE     ACADEMY. 

ARCESILAUS  ('Ap/cetn'Aaos)  or  ARCESILAS  ('Ap/ceo-iAas),1  the  founder  of  the 
Middle  Academy,  flourished  toward  the  close  of  the  third  century  B.C. 
He  was  born  at  Pitane,  in  ^Eolis.  He  studied  at  first  in  his  native  town, 
under  Autolycus,  a  mathematician,  and  afterward  went  to  Athens,  where 
he  became  the  disciple,  first  of  Theophrastus,  and  next  of  Polemo  and 
Grantor.  Not  content,  however,  with  any  single  school,  he  left  his  early 
masters  and  studied  under  skeptical  and  dialectic  philosophers.  He  was 
not  without  reputation  as  a  poet,  and  Diogenes  Laertius3  has  preserved 
two  epigrams  of  his.  Many  traits  of  character  are  recorded  of  him,  some 
of  them  of  a  pleasing  nature.  His  oratory  is  described  as  of  an  attractive 
and  persuasive  kind,  the  effect  of  it  being  enhanced  by  the  frankness  of 
his  demeanor.  Although  his  means  were  not  large,  his  resources  being 
chiefly  derived  from  King  Eumenes,  many  tales  were  told  of  his  unas 
suming  generosity.  But  it  must  be  admitted  that  there  was  another  side 
to  the  picture,  and  his  enemies  accused  him  of  the  grossest  profligacy — 
a  charge  which  he  only  answered  by  citing  the  example  of  Aristippus ; 
and  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  accusation  is  slightly  confirmed  by  the 
circumstance  of  his  having  died  in  the  seventy-sixth  year  of  his  age  from 
a  fit  of  excessive  drunkenness  ;  on  which  event  an  epigram  has  been 
preserved  by  Diogenes  Laertius. 

It  was  on  the  death  of  Crates  that  Arcesilaus  succeeded  to  the  chair 
of  the  Academy,  in  the  history  of  which  he  makes  so  important  an  era, 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.          2  Compare  Strab.,  i.,  p.  15.          3  Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  40 


404  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

The  doctrine  of  Plato  had  been  that  no  certain  knowledge  can  be  obtain 
ed  concerning  the  varying  forms  of  natural  bodies,  and  that  Ideas  are  the 
only  objects  of  science.  About  the  time  of  Arcesilaus  two  new  sects 
arose  ;  one  founded  by  Pyrrho,  which  held  the  doctrine  of  universal  skep 
ticism  ;  the  other  under  Zeno,  which  maintained  the  certainty  of  human 
knowledge,  and  taught  with  great  confidence  a  system  and  doctrine  es 
sentially  different  from  that  of  Plato.  These  sects,  especially  the  latter, 
became  so  popular  as  to  threaten  the  destruction  of  the  Platonic  system. 
In  this  situation  Arcesilaus  thought  it  necessary  to  exercise  a  cautious 
reserve  with  respect  to  the  doctrine  of  his  master,  concealing  his  opinions 
from  the  vulgar  under  the  appearance  of  doubt  and  uncertainty.  He  was 
more  desirous  to  prevent  the  progress  of  other  innovators  than  to  become 
himself  the  author  of  a  new  sect.  He,  therefore,  professed  to  derive  his 
doctrine  concerning  the  uncertainty  of  knowledge  from  Socrates,  Plato, 
and  other  philosophers.  The  doctrine  of  Arcesilaus  was,  that  although 
there  is  a  real  certainty  in  the  nature  of  things,  every  thing  is  uncertain 
to  the  human  understanding,  and  consequently,  that  all  confident  asser 
tions  are  unreasonable.  In  other  words,  he  did  not  doubt  the  existence 
of  truth  in  itself,  but  only  our  capacities  for  obtaining  it.  Hence  he  com 
bated  most  strongly  the  dogmatism  of  the  Stoics,  attacking  in  every  way 
their  doctrine  of  a  convincing  conception  (KaraATjTmKT?  ^ovTaaia),  as  un 
derstood  to  be  a  mean  between  science  and  opinion.1 

During  the  interval  between  the  death  of  Arcesilaus  and  the  appearance 
of  Carneades  in  the  academic  chair,  or  the  founding  of  the  New  Academy, 
the  Platonic  school  was  under  the  care  successively  of  Lacydes,  Evan- 
der,  and  Hegesinus,  none  of  whom  were  sufficiently  distinguished  to 
merit  particular  notice.  Lacydes  presided  over  the  Academy  for  twenty- 
six  years.  The  place  where  his  instructions  were  delivered  was  a  garden, 
named  the  Aa/cuSetoy,  provided  for  the  purpose  by  his  friend  Attains  Philo- 
metor,  king  of  Pergamus.  He  died  in  B.C.  241,  from  the  effects  of  ex 
cessive  drinking.2  Suidas  mentions  writings  of  his  under  the  general 
name  of  iX6ffoa  or  ire 


II.     NEW     ACADEMY. 

Arcesilaus  had  restricted  his  skepticism  to  philosophy  arid  science, 
though  his  antagonists  held  them  to  be  essentially  subversive  of  all  moral 
ity,  and  maintained  that  they  would  produce  the  dissolution  of  all  the 
bonds  of  virtue  and  religion.  Hence  his  successors  found  it  difficult  to 
support  the  credit  of  the  Academy  ;  and  Carneades,  one  of  the  disciples  of 
this  school,  thought  it  expedient  to  relinquish,  in  words  at  least,  some 
of  the  more  obnoxious  tenets  of  Arcesilaus.  From  this  period  the  Pla 
tonic  school  took  the  appellation  of  the  New  Academy. 

I.  CARNEADES  (KapvedS-ns}3  was  born  at  Gyrene  about  B.C.  213,  and 
was  the  founder  of  the  Third  or  Neiv  Academy.  In  B.C.  155,  he  was 
sent  to  Rome  by  the  Athenians,  along  with  Diogenes  and  Critolaus,  to 
deprecate  the  fine  of  500  talents  which  had  been  imposed  on  the  Atheni- 
ans  for  the  destruction  of  Oropiis.  At  Rome  he  attracted  great  notice 

i   Czc.,  Acad,,  ii.,  24.  2  Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  60.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  405 

from  his  eloquent  declamations  on  philosophical  subjects,  and  it  was  here 
that  he  first  delivered  his  famous  orations  on  Justice.  The  first  oration 
was  in  commendation  of  the  virtue  ;  and  the  next  day,  the  second  an 
swered  all  the  arguments  of  the  first,  and  showed  that  justice  was  not  a 
virtue,  but  a  matter  of  compact  for  the  maintenance  of  civil  society. 
Thereupon  Cato  moved  the  senate  to  send  the  philosopher  home  to  his 
school,  and  save  the  Roman  youth  from  his  demoralizing  doctrines. 
Carneades  died  in  B.C.  129,  at  the  age  of  eighty-five  or  (according  to 
Cicero)  ninety,  having  lived  at  Athens  twenty-seven  years  after  his  re 
turn  from  his  embassy.  He  is  described  as  a  man  of  unwearied  industry. 
He  was  so  engrossed  in  his  studies  that  he  let  his  hair  and  nails  grow  to 
an  immoderate  length,  and  was  so  absent  at  his  own  table  (for  he  would 
never  dine  out)  that  his  attendants  were  constantly  obliged  to  feed  him. 
In  his  old  age  he  suffered  from  cataract  in  his  eyes,  which  he  bore  with 
great  impatience,  and  showed,  moreover,  very  little,  if  any,  philosophic 
resignation  to  the  decay  of  nature. 

Carneades  left  no  writings,  and  all  that  is  known  of  his  doctrines  is  de 
rived  from  his  intimate  friend  and  pupil  Clitomachus  ;  but  so  true  was  he 
to  his  own  principles  of  withholding  assent,  that  Clitomachus  confesses 
he  never  could  ascertain  what  his  master  really  thought  on  any  subject. 
His  general  theory  was  that  man  did  not  possess,  and  never  could  pos 
sess,  any  criterion  of  truth.  He  argued  that,  if  there  were  a  criterion,  it 
must  exist  either  in  reason  (\6yos),  or  in  sensation  (ai<r9i)(ris),  or  in  con 
ception  (tyavraaria).  But  then  reason  itself  depends  on  conception,  and 
this,  again,  on  sensation  ;  and  we  have  no  means  of  judging  whether  our 
sensations  are  true  or  false,  whether  they  correspond  to  the  objects  that 
produce  them,  or  carry  wrong  impressions  to  the  mind,  producing  false 
conceptions  and  ideas,  and  leadirtg  reason  also  into  error.  Therefore,  sen 
sation,  conception,  and  reason  are  alike  disqualified  for  being  the  crite 
rion  of  truth.  Still,  however,  man  must  live  and  act,  and  must  have  some 
rule  of  practical  life  ;  therefore,  although  it  is  impossible  to  pronounce 
any  thing  as  absolutely  true,  we  may  yet  establish  probabilities  of  various 
degrees.  For  although  we  can  not  say  that  any  given  conception  or  sen 
sation  is  in  itself  true,  yet  some  sensations  appear  to  us  more  true  than 
others,  and  we  must  be  guided  by  that  which  seems  the  most  true. 
Again,  sensations  are  not  single,  but  generally  combined  with  others, 
which  either  confirm  or  contradict  them  ;  and  the  greater  this  combina 
tion,  the  greater  is  the  probability  of  that  being  true  which  the  rest  com 
bine  to  confirm ;  and  the  case  in  which  the  greatest  number  of  concep 
tions,  each  in  themselves  apparently  most  true,  should  combine  to  confirm 
that  which  also  in  itself  appears  most  true,  would  present  to  Carneades 
the  highest  probability,  and  his  nearest  approach  to  truth.  But  practical 
life  needed  no  such  rule  as  this,  and  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  a  system 
more  barren  of  all  help  to  man  than  that  of  Carneades.1 

II.  CLITOMACHUS  (KAemfyiaxos),2  a  Carthaginian  by  birth,  and  called 
Hasdrubal  in  his  own  language,  came  to  Athens  in  the  fortieth  year  of 
his  age,  previously  at  least  to  the  year  B.C.  146.  He  there  became  con- 
1  Smith,  I.  c.  2  /d.  s.  v. 


406  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

nected  with  Carneades,  under  whose  guidance  he  rose  to  be  one  of  the 
most  distinguished  disciples  of  his  school;  but  he 'also  studied,  at  the 
same  time,  the  philosophy  of  the  Stoics  and  Peripatetics.  Diogenes 
Laertius1  relates  that  he  succeeded  Carneades  as  the  head  of  the  Acad 
emy,  on  the  death  of  the  latter,  B.C.  129.  He  continued  to  teach  at 
Athens  until  as  late  as  B.C.  Ill  at  all  events,  since  Crassus  heard  him 
in  that  year.3  Of  his  works,  which  amounted  to  400  books  (|8t£A.fa)3,  only 
a  few  titles  are  preserved.  His  main  object  in  writing  them  was  to  make 
known  the  doctrines  of  his  master  Carneades,  from  whose  views  he 
never  dissented.  Clitomachus  continued  to  reside  at  Athens  till  the  end 
of  his  life ;  but  he  continued  to  cherish  a  strong  affection  for  his  native 
country,  and  when  Carthage  was  taken  in  B.C.  146,  he  wrote  a  work  to 
console  his  unfortunate  countrymen.  This  work,  which  Cicero  says  he 
had  read,  was  taken  from  a  discourse  of  Carneades,  and  was  intended  to 
exhibit  the  consolation  which  philosophy  supplies  even  under  the  greatest 
calamities.*  Cicero  seems  to  have  paid  a  good  deal  of  attention  to  the 
works  of  Clitomachus,  and  speaks  in  high  terms  of  his  industry,  penetra 
tion,  and  philosophical  talent.5  Clitomachus  appears  to  have  been  well 
known  to  his  contemporaries  at  Rome,  for  two  of  his  works  were  dedi 
cated  to  illustrious  Romans  ;  one  to  the  poet  C.  Lucilius,  and  the  other  to 
L.  Censorinus,  consul  in  B.C.  149. 

III.  PHILO  ($iAa>j/),6  a  native  of  Larissa,  was  a  disciple  of  Clitomachus. 
After  the  conquest  of  Athens  by  Mithradates,  he  removed  thence  to  Rome, 
where  he  settled  as  a  teacher  of  philosophy  and  rhetoric.     Here  Cicero 
was  among  his  hearers.7    Through  Philo  the  skepticism  of  the  Academy 
returned  to  its  original  starting-point,  as  a  polemical  antagonism  against 
the  Stoics,  and  so  entered  upon  a  new  course,  which  some  historians 
have  spoken  of  as  that  of  the  Fourth  Academy.8     He  maintained  that, 
by  means  of  conceptive  notions  (/caTaATj-TrnKr?  ^xwrao-fa),  objects  could  not 
be  comprehended  (a/caTaA^Trra),  but  were  comprehensible  according  to 
their  nature.9    How  he  understood  the  latter,  whether  he  referred  to  the 
evidence  and  accordance  of  the  sensations  which  we  receive  from  things, 
or  whether  he  had  returned  to  the  Platonic  assumption  of  an  immediate 
spiritual  perception,  is  not  clear. 

IV.  ANTISCHUS  ('Aj/r^xos)10  of  Ascalon,  the  founder,  as  he  is  called  by 
some,  of  a  Fifth  Academy,  was  a  friend  of  Lucullus,  the  antagonist  of 
Mithradates,  and  the  teacher  of  Cicero  during  his  studies  at  Athens,  B.C. 
79 ;  but  he  had  a  school  at  Alexandrea  also,  as  well  as  in  Syria,  where 
he  seems  to  have  ended  his  life.11    He  was  a  philosopher  of  considerable 
reputation  in  his  time,  for  Strabo,  in  describing  Ascalon,  mentions  his 
birth  there  as  a  mark  of  distinction  for  the  city,12  and  Cicero  frequently 
speaks  of  him  in  affectionate  and  respectful  terms,  as  the  best  and  wisest 
of  the  Academics,  and  the  most  polished  and  acute  philosopher  of  his  age.13 


Diog.  Laert.,  iv.,  67.  2  Cic.,  De  Orat.,  i.,  11.  3  Diog.  Laert.,  I.  c. 

Cic.,  Tusc.,  iii.,  22.  $  Acad.,  ii.,  6,  31.  «  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

Cic.,  Ep.  ad  Fam.,  xiii.,  1 ;  Acad.,  i.,  4.  e  Sext.  Emp.,  Hypotyp.,  i.,  220. 

Id.  ib.,  i.,  235.          »o  Smith.  Diet.  Biogr..  s.  v.        » i  Plut.,  Cic.,  c.  4  ;  LuculL,  c.  42. 
2  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  579.  l3  Cic.,  Acad.,  ii.,  35  ;  Brut.,  91. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  407 

His  principal  teacher  was  Philo — although  he  is  better  known  as  the  ad 
versary  than  the  disciple  of  Philo ;  and  Cicero  mentions  a  treatise  called 
Sosus,1  written  by  him  against  his  master,  in  which  he  refutes  the  skep 
ticism  of  the  Academics.  Another  of  his  works,  entitled  Canonica,  is 
quoted  by  Sextus  Empiricus,  and  appears  to  have  been  a  treatise  on  logic.2 
The  Academy,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  had  fallen  into  a  degree 
of  skepticism  which  seemed  to  strike  at  the  root  of  all  truth,  theoretical 
and  practical.  It  was,  therefore,  the  chief  object  of  Antiochus,  besides 
inculcating  particular  doctrines  in  moral  philosophy,  to  examine  the 
grounds  of  our  knowledge,  and  our  capacities  for  discovering  truth, 
though  no  complete  judgment  can  be  formed  of  his  success,  as  the  book 
in  which  Cicero  gave  the  fullest  representation  of  his  opinions  has  been 
lost.3  He  professed  to  revive  the  doctrines  of  the  Old  Academy,  or  of 
Plato's  school,  when  he  maintained,  in  opposition  to  Philo  and  Carneades, 
that  the  intellect  had  in  itself  a  test  by  which  it  could  distinguish  truth 
from  falsehood ;  or,  in  the  language  of  the  Academics,  discern  between 
the  images  arising  from  actual  objects  and  those  conceptions  that  had  no 
corresponding  reality.  On  the  whole,  Antiochus  would  appear  to  have 
been  an  eclectic  philosopher,  and  to  have  attempted  to  unite  the  doctrines 
of  the  Stoics  and  Peripatetics,  so  as  to  revive  the  Old  Academy. 

III.     STOIC     SCHOOL. 

I.  DIOGENES  (Aioyevris),*  surnamed  the  Babylonian,  was  a  native  of  Se- 
leucia,  in  Babylonia,  from  which  he  derived  his  surname,  in  order  to  dis 
tinguish  him  from  other  philosophers  of  the  name  of  Diogenes.     He  was 
educated  at  Athens,  under  the  auspices  of  Chrysippus,  and  succeeded 
Zeno  of  Tarsus  as  the  head  of  the  Stoic  school  at  Athens.     The  most 
memorable  event  of  his  life  is  the  part  he  took  in  the  embassy  which  the 
Athenians  sent  to  Rome  in  B.C.  155,  and  which  consisted  of  the  three 
philosophers,  Diogenes,  Carneades,  and  Critolaus.     These  three  philos 
ophers,  during  their  stay  at  Rome,  delivered  their  epideictic  speeches  at 
first  in  numerous  private  assemblies,  and  afterward,  also,  in  the  senate. 
Diogenes  pleased  his  audience  chiefly  by  his  sober  and  temperate  mode 
of  speaking.6     According  to  Lucian,  Diogenes  died  at  the  age  of  eighty- 
eight.    He  seems  to  have  closely  followed  the  views  of  his  master  Chry 
sippus,  especially  on  subjects  of  dialectics,  in  which  Diogenes  is  even 
said  to  have  instructed  Carneades.    He  was  the  author  of  several  works, 
of  which,  however,  little  more  than  the  titles  is  known. 

II.  PAN^ETIUS  (ncwamos),6  a  native  of  Rhodes,7  and  a  celebrated  Stoic 
philosopher,  studied  first  at  Pergamus,  under  the  grammarian  Crates,  and 
subsequently  at  Athens,  under  the  Stoic  Diogenes  the  Babylonian,  and 
his  disciple,  Antipater  of  Tarsus.8     He  afterward  went  to  Rome,  where 
he  became  intimate  with  Lselius  and  Scipio  Africanus  the  younger.     In 
B.C.  144,  he  accompanied  Scipio  on  the  embassy  which  he  undertook  to 


1  Cic.,  Acad.,  iv.,  4.  2  Sext.  Ernp.,  vii.,  201. 

3  Cic.,  Ep.  ad  Fam.,  ix.,  8.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  v. 

8  Aul.  Gell.,  vii.,  14  ;  Cic.,  Acad.,  ii.,  45.  •  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  w. 

1  Suid.,  *.  v.;  Strab.,  xiv.,  968.  •  Cic..  De  Divi-n.,  i.,  3. 


408  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

the  kings  of  Egypt  and  Asia  in  alliance  with  Rome.  Pansetius  succeeded 
Antipater  as  the  head  of  the  Stoic  school,  and  died  at  Athens,  at  all  events, 
before  B.C.  111.  The  principal  work  of  Paneetius  was  his  treatise  on  the 
theory  of  moral  obligation  (-n-epl  rov  Ka0^«wros),  from  which  Cicero  took 
the  greater  part  of  his  work  De  OJficiis.  Pansetius  had  softened  down  the 
harsh  severity  of  the  older  Stoics,  and,  without  giving  up  their  funda 
mental  definitions,  had  modified  them  so  as  to  make  them  applicable  to 
the  conduct  of  life,  and  had  clothed  them  in  the  garb  of  eloquence.  His 
work  on  the  philosophical  sects  (irepl  cupeVeouj/)  appears  to  have  been  rich 
in  facts  and  critical  remarks  ;  and  the  notices  which  we  have  about  Soc 
rates,  and  on  the  books  of  Plato  and  others  of  the  Socratic  school,  given 
on  the  authority  of  Paneetius,  were  probably  taken  from  that  work.  The 
student  may  consult,  in  relation  to  Panaetius,  the  work  of  Van  L;  :'  Ion, 
"  Disputatio  Hist.  Grit,  de  Panatio  Rhodio,"  &c.,  Leyden,  1802,  8vo. 

III.  POSIDONIUS  (IToo-eiScovios),1  a  distinguished  Stoic  philosopher,  was  a 
native  of  Apamea,  in  Syria.2  The  date  of  his  birth  is  not  known  with 
any  exactness,  but  may  be  placed  about  B.C.  135.  He  studied  at  Athens 
under  Pa'haetius,  after  whose  death  he  set  out  on  his  travels.  After  vis 
iting  most  of  the  countries  on  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean,  he  fixed 
his  abode  at  Rhodes,  where  he  became  the  head  of  the  Stoic  school.  He 
also  took  a  prominent  part  in  the  political  affairs  of  Rhodes,  and  was  sent 
as  ambassador  to  Rome  in  B.C.  86.  Cicero,  when  he  visited  Rhodes, 
received  instruction  from  Posidonius.3  Pompey  also  had  a  great  admi 
ration  for  him,  and  visited  him  twice,  in  B.C.  67  and  B.C.  62.*  To  the 
occasion  of  his  first  visit  probably  belongs  the  story  that  Posidonius,  to 
prevent  the  disappointment  of  his  distinguished  visitor,  though  severely 
afflicted  with  the  gout,  had  a  long  discourse  on  the  topic  that  pain  is  not 
an  evil.5  In  B.C.  51,  Posidonius  removed  to  Rome,  and  appears  to  have 
died  soon  after,  at  the  age  of  eighty-four.  Posidonius  was  a  man  of  ex 
tensive  and  varied  acquirements  in  almost  all  departments  of  human 
knowledge.  Cicero  thought  so  highly  of  his  powers  that  he  requested 
him  to  write  an  account  of  his  consulship.6  As  a  physical  investigator 
he  was  greatly  superior  to  the  Stoics  generally,  attaching  himself  in  this 
respect  rather  to  Aristotle.  His  geographical  and  historical  knowledge 
was  very  extensive.  He  cultivated  astronomy,  also,  with  considerable 
diligence.  He  constructed  a  planetary  machine,  or  revolving  sphere,  to 
exhibit  the  daily  motions  of  the  sun,  moon,  and  planets.  His  calculation 
of  the  circumference  of  the  earth  differed  widely,  however,  from  that  of 
Eratosthenes.  He  made  it  only  one  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  stadia, 
and  his  measurement  was  pretty  generally  adopted.  None  of  the  writ 
ings  of  Posidonius  have  come  down  to  us  entire.  His  fragments  are 
collected  by  Bake,  Leyden,  1810,  8vo. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  968 ;  xvi.,  p.  1093. 

3  CM;.,  De  Nat.  Dear.,  i.,  3  ;  De  Fin.,  i.,  2.          *  Strab.,  xi.,  p.  492  ;  Pint.,  Pomp.,  42. 
5  Cic.,  Tusc.,  ii.,  25.  6  Ep.  ad  Att.,  ii.,  1. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  409 


CHAPTER  XLII. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD— continued. 
ELOQUENCE. 

I.  TRUE  eloquence,  that,  namely,  which  speaks  to  the  heart  and  the 
feeling  of  men,  exists  only  in  conjunction  with  freedom.     Under  the  rule, 
therefore,  of  the  successors  of  Alexander,  finding  no  longer  an  object 
worthy  of  itself,  it  abandoned  the  scene  of  public  affairs,  and  took  refuge 
in  the  schools.     Athens,  now  fallen  to  the  condition  of  a  municipal  city, 
ceased  to  be  the  exclusive  abode  of  an  art  from  which,  in  earlier  days, 
she  had  derived  so  fair  a  lustre.     In  place  of  the  orators  of  Attica  we 
now  hear  of  the  orators  of  Asia  and  the  isles  of  the  ^Egean,  or,  rather, 
from  this  time  forth  we  hear,  not  of  orators,  but  of  rhetoricians. 

II.  The  most  celebrated  of  these  schools  of  rhetoric  was  that  of  Rhodes, 
which  had  been  founded  originally  by  JEschines.     In  this  and  similar  in 
stitutions  the  masters  gave  out  themes  on  which  their  pupils  were  re 
quired  to  exercise  their  talents.    These  themes  were  sometimes  historical 
subjects  ;  more  frequently,  however,  the  celebrated  cases  which  had  oc 
cupied  the  attention  of  the  great  masters  of  antiquity  were  placed  anew 
before  some  youthful  areopagus. 

III.  With  the  change  of  object,  however,  a  change  was  also  experi 
enced  in  the  very  nature  of  the  art  itself:    The  aim  of  the  authors  of 
these  oratorical  exercises  was  not  to  sway  the  masses,  or  to  bend  to  the 
will  of  the  speaker  some  grave  and  unimpassioned  tribunal,  but  to  distin 
guish  themselves  among  their  fellow-pupils  by  brilliancy  of  display,  and 
to  gain  the  suffrages  of  auditors  who  did  not  desire  to  have  their  feelings 
aroused,  but  merely  sought  for  gratification  and  literary  amusement. 
Unto  such  hearers,  a  style  glittering  with  conceits  and  overloaded  with 
ornaments  would  prove  far  more  pleasing  than  the  chaste  simplicity  of 
the  great  masters  of  eloquence.1 

IV.  This  new  style  of  oratory,  called  the  Asiatic,  or  florid,  is  thus  char 
acterized  by  Quintilian  :  "  Et  antiqua  guidem  divisio  inter  Asianos  et  Attic- 
os  fuit,  cum  hi  pressi  et  integri,  contra  injlati  illi  et  inanes  haberentur,  et  si 
his  nihil  superflueret,  illis  judicium  maxime  ac  modus  dcesset.     Transitus 
vero  fuit  ab  Attica  ad  Asiaticam  eloqucntiam  per  Rlwdios  oratores."     The 
faults  here  referred  to  were  particularly  apparent  in  HEGESIAS  of  Magne 
sia,  the  rhetorician  and  historian,  so  much  so,  in  fact,  that  he  was  re 
garded  by  the  ancients  as  the  parent  of  this  Asiatic  eloquence,  though  he 
himself  professed  to  be  an  imitator  of  Lysias.     Traces,  however,  of  the 
decline  of  oratory  were  apparent  before  the  time  of  Hegesias  in  the  pro 
ductions  of  DEMETRIUS  PHALEREUS  (so  called  from  his  birth-place,  the  de- 
mus  of  Phalerum,  where  he  was  born,  B.C.  345),  who  was  placed  by  Cas- 
sander  at  the  head  of  the  administration  of  Athens.     The  orations  of  this 

1   SchOU,  Hist,  de  la  Litt.  Gr.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  239. 

s 


410  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

individual,  who  is  generally  regarded  as  the  last  among  the  Attic  orators 
worthy  of  the  name,1  bore  evident  marks  of  the  decline  of  eloquence. 
They  were  soft,  insinuating,  and  effeminate,  and  altogether  deficient  in  the 
strength  and  energy  which  characterize  so  forcibly  the  orations  of  Demo 
sthenes.  Demetrius,  however,  was  a  man  of  the  most  extensive  acquire 
ments,  and  the  author  of  numerous  works,  historical,  political,  philosoph 
ical,  and  poetical.  These  have  all  perished ;  for  the  work  on  elocution 
(irepl  fpfj.rjveias}  which  has  come  down  to  us  under  his  name  is  probably 
the  work  of  an  Alexandrine  sophist,  of  the  name  of  Demetrius.  It  is  also 
believed  that  it  was  owing  to  his  influence  with  Ptolemy  I.  that  books 
were  first  collected  at  Alexandrea,  and  that  he  thus  laid  the  foundation, 
in  fact,  of  the  great  Alexandrine  library. 


CHAPTER  XLIII. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD— continued. 
GRAMMATICAL     SCIENC  E. G  RAM  MARIANS. 

I.  DURING  the  preceding  periods  the  art  of  criticism  and  the  interpre 
tation  of  earlier  authors  had  not  yet  been  regarded  as  a  particular  science. 
Grammatical  erudition  (jpa^aTiKi]  r^x^n)  did  not  properly  commence  be 
fore  the  third  century  previous  to  our  era.     It  was  then  that  those  lists 
of  classic  authors  were  compiled  to  which  we  have  already  alluded,  and 
which  were  comprehended  under  the  general  name  of  the  Alexandrean 
canon.     It  was  then  that  the  revision,  correction,  and  explanation  of  the 
texts  of  these  writers  (8:<fy>0a><m,  o^e/axm)  became  a  regular  occupation. 
Commentaries  (uTTOjUj^^ara,  QyyhffeLs}  were  then  written  on  entire  works  ; 
the  difficulties  of  obscure  passages  were  cleared  up,  and  oftentimes  dim" 
culties  were  purposely  imagined  in  order  to  make  a  display  of  sagacity 
and  erudition  ((V/T^ara,  irpo^x^^ara,  X-uveis).     Those  who  raised  such 
questions  were  called  fv<na.TiKoiy  or  "  difficulty-starters,"  and  those  who 
answered  them,  Xvrutoi  or  eVjAuTtW,  "  difficulty-solvers."2 

II.  Some  grammarians  of  this  same  period  employed  themselves  in 
explaining  words  or  phrases  that  had  become  obsolete,  or  that  belonged 
to  foreign  dialects  or  tongues  (y\Sxrffa.i,  Ae|eis) ;  others,  in  collecting  to 
gether  analogous  or  parallel  passages  found  in  different  writers  ;  others, 
again,  in  composing  grammars,  or  treatises  on  some  particular  parts  of 
the  language.     The  works  of  Homer  served  as  a  basis  for  most  of  these 
literary  labors. 

III.  It  can  not  be  doubted  that  the  influence  which  these  learned  re 
searches  had  on  both  the  language  and  literature  of  Greece  was  consid 
erable  of  its  kind  ;  and  the  works  of  these  grammarians  or  philologists 
would  have  been  of  great  assistance  to  us  for  the  correct  understanding 
of  the  ancient  authors.    Unfortunately,  however,  their  successors,  instead 
of  pursuing  the  same  path  of  zealous  research,  were  content  with  making 
extracts  from  the  works  of  their  predecessors,  and  forming  all  sorts  of 
i  Cic.,  Brut.,  8;  Quint.,  x.,  1,  80.          2  Scholl,  Hist,  de  la  Litt.  Gr..  vol.  iii.,  p.  182,  seqq. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  411 

new  compilations.  The  result,  therefore,  has  been,that  the  original  works 
have  in  a  great  measure  perished,  and  these  meagre  compilations  have 
come  down  to  us  in  their  place.1 

IV.  The  most  celebrated  of  the  grammarians  of  this  period  were  ZE- 
NODOTUS,  ARISTOPHANES  of  Byzantium,  ARISTARCHUS,  AMMONIUS,  DEME 
TRIUS  of  Scepsis,  PAMPHILUS  of  Alexandrea,  DIONYSIUS  THRAX,  CRATES  of 
Mallus,  ARTEMIDORUS,  SOSIBIUS,  PAL^EPHATUS,  and  DIDYMUS. 

1.  ZENODOTUS  (ZrjvJSoTos),2  of  Ephesus,  a  celebrated  grammarian,  was 
the  first  superintendent  of  the  great  library  at  Alexandrea,  and  flourished 
under  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  B.C.  280.     Zenodotus  was  employed  by 
Philadelphus,  together  with  his  two  distinguished  contemporaries,  Alex 
ander  the  ^Etolian  and  Lycophron,  to  collect  and  revise  all  the  Greek 
poets.     Alexander,  we  are  told,  undertook  the  task  of  collecting  the  trag 
edies,  Lycophron  the  comedies,  and  Zenodotus  the  productions  of  Homer 
and  the  other  illustrious  poets  (Homeri  poemata  et  rdiquorum  inlustrium 
poetarum).     This  important  statement,  preserved  by  the  scholiast  on 
Plautus,  from  the  commentary  of  Tzetzes  on  the  Plutus  of  Aristophanes, 
has  given  rise  to  much  discussion ;  but  it  is  now  generally  conceded  that 
by  the  words  "  the  other  illustrious  poets"  are  meant  all  the  other  illus 
trious  poets,  both  epic  and  lyric.     Zenodotus,  however,  devoted  his  chief 
attention  to  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey.     Hence  he  is  called  the  first  reviser 
(8iop8tarfis)  of  Homer,  and  his  recension  (5i<*p0a><m)  of  the  Iliad  and  Odys 
sey  obtained  great  popularity.     The  corrections  which  Zenodotus  applied 
to  the  text  of  Homer  were  of  three  kinds.     1.  He  expunged  verses.     2. 
He  marked  them  as  spurious,  but  left  them  in  his  copy.     3.  He  intro 
duced  new  readings,  or  transposed  or  altered  verses.3     The  great  atten 
tion  which  Zenodotus  paid  to  the  language  of  Homer  caused  a  new  epoch 
in  the  grammatical  study  of  the  Greek  language.     The  results  of  his  in 
vestigations  respecting  the  meaning  and  the  use  of  words  were  contained 
in  two  works  which  he  published  under  the  title  of  a  Glossary  (rAwo-crai), 
and  a  Dictionary  of  barbarous  or  foreign  phrases  (Ae|eis  sdviKal).     It  was 
probably  from  his  glossary,  as  Wolf  has  remarked,  that  the  grammarians 
took  the  few  explanations  of  the  passages  of  Homer  which  they  cite  un 
der  the  name  of  Zenodotus,  since  it  is  very  doubtful  whether  he  wrote 
commentaries  on  the  poet.     The  following  works  may  be  consulted  in 
relation  to  Zenodotus :  HefFter,  "  De  Zenodoto  ejusque  studiis  Homericis" 
Brandenburg,  1839  ;  Diintzer,  "  De  Zenodoti  Studiis  Homericis,"  Gottingen, 
1848 ;  Grafenhan,  "  Geschichte  der  Klassischen  Philologie,"  vol.  i.,  p.  379, 
430,  534 ;  vol.  ii.,  p.  32. 

2.  ARISTOPHANES  ('ApKrro^ai/Tjs),*  of  Byzantium,  one  of  the  most  emi 
nent  Greek  grammarians  at  Alexandrea,  was  a  pupil  of  Zenodotus  and 
Eratosthenes,  and  teacher  of  the  celebrated  Aristarchus.     He  lived  about 
B.C.  264,  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  II.  and  Ptolemy  III.,  and  had  the  su 
preme  management  of  the  library  at  Alexandrea.     All  the  ancients  agree 
in  placing  him  among  the  most  distinguished  critics  and  grammarians. 
He  founded  a  school  of  his  own  at  Alexandrea,  and  displayed  great  merit 

1  Scfioll,  Hist,  de  la  Lift.  Gr.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  182,  seqq.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Compare  Clinton,  Fast.  Hell,  vol.  iii.,  p.  491,  seqq.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr..  s.  v. 


412  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

in  what  he  did  for  the  Greek  language  and  literature.  He  and  Aristar- 
chus  were  the  principal  ones  who  made  out  the  canon  of  the  classical 
writers  of  Greece,  in  the  selection  of  whom  they  showed,  with  a  few  ex 
ceptions,  a  correct  taste  and  appreciation  of  what  was  really  good.1  Ar 
istophanes  was  the  first  who  introduced  the  use  of  accents  into  the  Greek 
language.2  The  subjects,  however,  with  which  he  chiefly  occupied  him 
self  were  the  criticism  and  interpretation  of  the  ancient  Greek  poets, 
and  more  especially  Homer,  of  whose  works  he  made  a  new  and  critical 
edition  or  SdpQao-is.  But  he,  too,  like  his  disciple  Aristarchus,  was  not 
occupied  with  the  criticism  or  the  explanation  of  words  and  phrases  only, 
but  his  attention  was  also  directed  toward  the  higher  subjects  of  criti 
cism  :  he  discussed  the  aesthetical  construction  and  the  design  of  the 
Homeric  poems.  In  the  same  spirit  he  studied  and  commented  upon 
other  Greek  poets,  such  as  Hesiod,  Pindar,  Alcaeus,  Sophocles,  Euripides, 
Anacreon,  Aristophanes,  and  others.  The  philosophers  Plato  and  Aris 
totle  likewise  engaged  his  attention,  and  of  the  former,  as  of  several 
among  the  poets,  he  made  new  and  critical  editions.3  All,  however,  that 
\ve  possess  of  his  numerous  and  learned  works  consists  of  fragments 
scattered  through  the  scholia  on  the  above-mentioned  poets,  some  argu 
ments  to  the  tragic  poets,  and  to  some  of  the  plays  of  Aristophanes,  and 
a  part  of  his  Ae£ets,  which  is  printed  in  Boissoriade's  edition  of  Herodian's 
"  Partitiones."  Among  his  other  works  we  may  mention,  1.  Notes  upon 
the  nivaKfs  of  Callimachus,*  and  upon  the  poems  of  Anacreon.5  2.  An 
abridgment  of  Aristotle's  work,  Ilept  Screws  Zwcav,  which  is,  perhaps,  the 
same  as  the  work  called  'TTro/uj/VaTa  ets  'Apio"roTeA7?j>.  3.  A  work  on  the 
Attic  hetaerse,  consisting  of  several  books.6  4.  A  number  of  grammatical 
works,  such  as  'A.TTIKO).  Ae'£eis,  AaKuviKal  T\uxr(rai,  and  a  work  Htpl  'Ava- 
\oylas,  which  was  much  used  by  M.  Terentius  Varro.  5.  Some  works  of 
an  historical  character,  as  &r)fta'iKd  (perhaps  the  same  as  the  ©Tj/SaiW  opoi), 
and  BotamKa,  which  are  frequently  mentioned  by  ancient  writers.7  A 
collection  of  all  the  extant  fragments  of  Aristophanes  has  been  made  by 
Nauck,  Halle,  1848,  8vo. 

3.  ARISTARCHUS  ('Apiffrapxos)*  the  most  celebrated  grammarian  and 
critic  in  all  antiquity,  was  a  native  of  Samothrace.  He  was  educated  at 
Alexandrea,  in  the  school  of  Aristophanes  of  Byzantium,  and  afterward 
founded  himself  a  grammatical  and  critical  school,  which  nourished  for  a 
long  time  at  Alexandrea,  and  subsequently  at  Rome  also.  Ptolemy  Phi- 
lopator  intrusted  to  him  the  education  of  his  son  Ptolemy  Epiphanes, 
and  Ptolemy  Physcon,  too,  was  one  of  his  pupils.9  Owing,  however,  to 
the  bad  treatment  which  the  scholars  and  philosophers  of  Alexandrea 
experienced  in  the  reign  of  Physcon,  Aristarchus,  then  at  an  advanced 
age,  left  Egypt  and  went  to  Cyprus,  where  he  is  said  to  have  died,  at  the 
age  of  seventy-two,  of  voluntary  starvation,  because  he  was  suffering 

1  Ruhnken,  Hist.  Crit.  Orat.  Gr.,  p.  xcv.,  set]. 

2  Kreuser,  Griech.  Accentlehre,  p.  167,  seqq. 

3  Schol.  ad  Hes.,  Theog.,  68;   Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  61. 

4  Athen.,  ix.,  p.  408.  5  JElian,  H.  A.,  vii.,  39,  47.  6  Athen.,  xiii.,  p.  567. 

7  Suid.,  s.  v.  '(VoAtoi'os  Zeus/  Pint.,  De  Mai.  Herod.,  31,  33,  &c. 

8  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  9  Athen.,  ii.,  p.  71. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  413 

from  incurable  dropsy.  He  left  behind  him  two  sons,  Aristagoras  and 
Aristarchus,  who  are  likewise  called  grammarians,  but  neither  of  them 
appears  to  have  inherited  any  thing  of  the  spirit  or  talents  of  the  father. 

The  numerous  followers  and  disciples  of  Aristarchus  were  designated 
by  the  names  of  of  JApi<rrapx6'°'>  or  ol  *"*'  'Apicrrdpxov.  Aristarchus,  his 
master  Aristophanes,  and  his  opponent,  Crates  of  Malms,  the  head  of  the 
grammatical  school  at  Pergamus,  were  the  most  eminent  grammarians 
of  this  period  ;  but  Aristarchus  surpassed  them  all  in  knowledge  and 
critical  skill.  His  whole  life  was  devoted  to  grammatical  and  critical 
pursuits,  with  the  view  to  explain  and  constitute  correct  texts  of  the  an 
cient  poets  of  Greece,  such  as  Homer,  Pindar,  Archilochus,  yEschylus, 
Sophocles,  Aristophanes,  Ion,  and  others.  His  grammatical  studies  em 
braced  every  thing  which  the  term  in  its  widest  sense  then  comprised  ; 
and  he,  together  with  his  great  contemporaries,  are  regarded  as  the  first 
that  established  fixed  principles  of  grammar,  though  Aristarchus  himself 
is  often  called  the  prince  of  grammarians  (6  KopvQaios  ruv  ypa/j.fj.ariKuiv,  or 
Suidas  ascribes  to  him  more  than  800  commentaries 
Besides  these,  we  find  mention  of  a  very  important  work, 
iTfpl  avaXoyias,  of  which,  unfortunately,  a  very  few  fragments  alone  are 
extant.  It  was  attacked  by  Crates  in  a  work,  irepl  av(a(j.a\ias.1 

All  the  works  of  Aristarchus  are  lost,  and  all  that  we  have  of  his  con 
sists  of  short  fragments,  which  are  scattered  through  the  scholia  on  the 
above-mentioned  poets.  These  fragments,  however,  would  be  utterly  in 
sufficient  to  give  us  any  idea  of  the  immense  activity,  the  extensive  knowl 
edge,  and,  above  all,  of  the  uniform  strictness  of  his  critical  principles, 
were  it  not  that  Eustatliius,  and,  still  more,  the  Venetian  scholia  on 
Homer  (first  published  by  Villoison,  Venice,  1788,  fol.),  had  preserved 
such  extracts  from  his  works  on  Homer  as,  notwithstanding  their  frag 
mentary  nature,  show  us  the  critic  in  his  whole  greatness.  As  far  as 
the  Homeric  poems  are  concerned,  he,  above  all  things,  endeavored  to 
restore  their  genuine  text,  and  carefully  to  clear  it  of  all  later  interpola 
tions  and  corruptions.  He  marked  those  verses  which  he  thought  spuri 
ous  with  an  obelus,  and  those  which  he  considered  particularly  beautiful 
with  an  asterisk.  It  is  now  no  longer  a  matter  of  doubt  that,  generally 
speaking,  the  text  of  the  Homeric  poems,  such  as  it  has  come  down  to 
us,  and  the  division  of  the  poems  each  into  twenty-four  rhapsodies,  are 
the  work  of  Aristarchus ;  that  is  to  say,  the  edition  which  Aristarchus 
prepared  of  the  Homeric  poems  became  the  basis  of  all  subsequent  edi 
tions.  To  restore  this  recension  of  Aristarchus  has  been,  more  or  less, 
the  great  object  with  nearly  all  the  editors  of  Homer  since  the  days  of 
Wolf,  a  critic  of  a  kindred  genius,  who  first  showed  the  great  importance 
to  be  attached  to  the  edition  of  Aristarchus.  Its  general  appreciation  in 
antiquity  is  attested  by  the  fact  that  so  many  other  grammarians,  as  Cal- 
listratus,  Aristonicus,  Didymus,  and  Ptolemseus  of  Ascalon,  wrote  sep 
arate  works  upon  it. 

In  explaining  and  interpreting  the  Homeric  poems,  his  merits  were  as 
great  as  those  he  acquired  by  his  critical  labors.  His  explanations,  as 
1  Aul.  GelL,  ii.,  25. 


414  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

well  as  his  criticisms,  were  not  confined  to  the  mere  detail  of  words  and 
phrases,  but  he  entered  also  upon  investigations  of  a  higher  order,  con 
cerning  mythology,  geography,  and  on  the  artistic  composition  and  struc 
ture  of  the  Homeric  poems.  He  was  a  decided  opponent  of  the  allegor 
ical  interpretation  of  the  poet,  which  was  then  beginning,  which  some 
centuries  later  became  very  general,  and  which  has  in  later  days  been 
carried  to  the  extreme  of  absurdity.  The  antiquity  of  the  Homeric  po 
ems,  however,  as  well  as  the  historical  character  of  their  author,  seems 
never  to  have  been  doubted  by  Aristarchus.  He  bestowed  great  care 
upon  the  metrical  correctness  of  the  text,  and  is  said  to  have  provided  the 
works  of  Homer  and  some  other  poets  with  accents,  the  invention  of 
which  is  ascribed  to  Aristophanes  of  Byzantium.  A  scholiast  on  Homer 
declares  that  Aristarchus  must  be  followed  in  preference  to  other  critics, 
even  if  they  should  be  right ;  and  Panaetius1  called  Aristarchus  a  /J.CLVTIS, 
to  express  the  skill  and  felicity  with  which  he  always  hit  the  truth  in 
his  criticisms  and  explanations.  For  farther  information  respecting  this 
distinguished  scholar,  the  student  is  referred  to  Wolf,  Prolegom.  in  Horn., 
p.  ccxvi.,  seqq.,  and  Lehrs,  De  Aristarchi  studiis  Homericis,  Konigsburg, 
1833,  8vo. 

4.  AMMONIUS  ('A^^j/ios),8  of  Alexandrea,  was  one  of  the  chief  teachers 
in  the  grammatical  school  founded  by  Aristarchus.3    He  wrote  comment 
aries  upon  Homer,  Pindar,  and  Aristophanes,  none  of  which  are  extant. 
He  must  not  be  confounded  with  Ammonius  Grammaticus,  the  author  of 
the  treatise  On  the  Differences  of  Words  of  like  Signification  (irepl  6/j.oi(0v  ual 
5ia<p6pwi/  \el-f wv),  who  lived  at  the  close  of  the  fourth  century.4 

5.  DEMETRIUS  (Arj^rpios)  of  Scepsis,  a  Greek  grammarian  of  the  time 
of  Aristarchus  and  Crates.5     He  was  a  man  of  good  family  and  an  acute 
philologer.6     Demetrius  was  the  author  of  a  very  extensive  work,  which 
is  very  often  referred  to,  and  bore  the  title  of  Tpwiicbs  8i({/coo>tos.     It  con 
sisted  of  at  least  twenty-six  books.7     This  work  was  an  historical  and 
geographical  commentary  on  that  part  of  the  second  book  of  the  Iliad  in 
which  the  forces  of  the  Trojans  are  enumerated.     He  is  sometimes  sim 
ply  called  the  Scepsian,  and  sometimes  merely  Demetrius.     The  various 
passages  in  which  he  is  either  mentioned  or  quoted  are  collected  by 
Westermann,  in  his  edition  of  Vossius,  De  Historicis  Greeds,  p.  179, 
seqq. 

6.  PAMPHILUS  (nd/jL<pi\os),  an  Alexandrean  grammarian  of  the  school  of 
Aristarchus,  and  the  author  of  a  lexicon,  which  is  supposed  by  some 
scholars  to  have  formed  the  foundation  of  the  lexicon  of  Hesychius. 
Suidas  says  that  it  was  in  95  books  (other  readings  give  75,  205,  and  405), 
and  that  it  extended  from  e  to  &>,  the  preceding  part,  from  a  to  8,  having 
been  compiled  by  Zopyrion.     It  was  arranged  in  alphabetical  order,  and 
particular  attention  was  paid  in  it  to  words  peculiar  to  their  respective 
dialects.    Pamphilus  appears  to  have  lived,  according  to  some,  in  the  first 
century  of  our  era,  which  would  throw  him  into  the  sixth  or  Roman  pe- 

1  Athen.,  xiv.,  p.  634.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Suid.,  s.  v.  'A/U.JU.WVIOS. 

*  Matter,  UEcole  d'Alexandrie,  vol.  i.,  p.  179,  233.  5  Strab.,  xiii.,  p.  609. 

6  Diog.  Laert.,  v.,  84.  7  Strab.,  xiii.,  p.  603. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  415 

riod  of  Greek  literature  ;  but  it  is,  in  all  probability,  more  correct  to  assign 
him  an  earlier  date,  and  rank  him  in  the  present  or  fifth  period.1 

7.  DIONYSIUS  (Atoj/u<nos),a  surnamed  THRAX,  or  the  Thracian,  appears 
to  have  been  so  called  from  the  circumstance  of  his  father's  being  a 
Thracian.     He  himself  was,  according  to  some,  a  native  of  Alexandrea, 
and,  according  to  others,  of  Byzantium ;  but  he  is  also  called  a  Rhodian, 
because  at  one  time  he  resided  at  Rhodes,  and  gave  instruction  there.3 
Dionysius  also  stayed  for  some  time  at  Rome,  where  he  was  likewise  en 
gaged  in  teaching,  about  B.C.  80.     Farther  particulars  about  his  life  are 
not  known.     He  was  the  author  of  numerous  grammatical  works,  manu 
als,  and  commentaries.    We  possess  under  his  name  a  re'xfTj  ypa/j./j.aTiK-f], 
a  small  work,  which,  however,  became  the  basis  of  all  subsequent  gram 
mars,  and  was  a  standard  book  in  grammar-schools  for  many  centuries. 
The  form,  however,  in  which  it  has  come  down  to  us  is  not  the  original 
one,  many  interpolations  having  been  made,  and  the  work  having  been 
sometimes  abridged,  and  sometimes  extended  or  otherwise  modified. 
These  interpolations  appear  to  have  been  introduced  at  a  very  early  pe 
riod,  and  it  was  probably  owing  to  them  that  some  of  the  ancient  com 
mentators  on  the  grammar  found  in  it  things  which  could  not  have  been 
written  by  a  disciple  of  Aristarchus,  and  therefore  doubted  its  genuine 
ness.     Dionysius  did  much,  also,  fcr  the  explanation'  and  criticism  of 
Homer,  as  may  be  inferred  from  the  quotations  in  the  Venetian  scholia. 
He  does  not,  however,  appear  to  have  written  a  regular  commentaiy,  but 
to  have  inserted  his  remarks  on  Homer  in  several  other  works.     His 
chief  merit  consists  in  the  impulse  which  he  gave  to  the  study  of  sys 
tematic  grammar,  and  in  what  he  did  for  the  correct  understanding  of 
Homer. 

The  Te'xKij  prjTopiKTj  of  Dionysius  was  first  printed  in  the  Bibliotheca  of  Fabricius  (vol. 
iv.,  p.  20,  seqq.,  of  the  old  edition) ;  Villoison  (Anecd.,  ii.,  99)  then  added  some  excerpta 
and  scholia  from  a  Venetian  MS.,  together  with  which  the  grammar  was  afterward 
printed  in  Harles's  edition  of  Fabricius,  vol.  vi.,  p.  311,  seqq.,  and  somewhat  later  in 
Bekker's  Anecdota,  vol.  ii.,  p.  627,  seqq. 

8.  CRATES  (KpaxTjs)4  of  Mallus,  in  Cilicia,  is  said  by  Suidas  to  have  been 
a  Stoic  philosopher,  but  is  far  better  known  as  one  of  the  most  distin 
guished  of  the  ancient  Greek  grammarians.    He  lived  in  the  reign  of  Ptol 
emy  Philometor,  and  was  contemporary  with  Aristarchus,  in  rivalry  with 
whom  he  supported  the  fame  of  the  school  of  Pergamus  against  that  of 
Alexandrea.     He  was  brought  up  at  Tarsus,  whence  he  removed  to  Per 
gamus,  and  there  lived  under  the  patronage  of  Eumenes  II.  and  Attalus 
II.    He  wras  the  founder  of  the  Pergamene  school  of  grammar,  and  seems 
to  have  been  at  one  time  the  chief  librarian.     About  the  year  157  B.C., 
shortly  after  the  death  of  Ennius,  Crates  was  sent  by  Attalus  as  an  am 
bassador  to  Rome,  where  he  introduced  for  the  first  time  the  study  of 
grammar.    The  results  of  his  visit  lasted  a  long  time,  as  may  be  observed 
especially  in  the  writings  of  Varro.5    An  accident,  by  which  he  broke  a 
leg,  gave  him  the  leisure,  which  his  official  duties  might  otherwise  have 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.        2  Id.,  s.  v.        3  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  655  ;  Athcn.,  xi.,  p.  489. 
*  Smith,  Viet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.        5  Sueton.,  De  Illustr.  Gramm.,  2. 


416 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


interrupted,  of  holding  frequent  grammatical  lectures  (a/cpoa<reis).  We 
have  no  farther  particulars  of  his  life. 

In  the  grammatical  system  of  Crates  a  strong  distinction  was  made 
between  criticism  and  grammar,  the  latter  of  which  sciences  he  considered 
as  quite  subordinate  to  the  former.  The  office  of  the  critic,  according  to 
Crates,  was  to  investigate  every  thing  which  could  throw  light  upon  lit 
erature,  either  from  within  or  from  without  ;  that  of  the  grammarian  was 
only  to  apply  the  rules  of  language,  in  order  to  clear  up  the  meaning  of 
particular  passages,  and  to  settle  the  text,  the  prosody,  the  accentuation, 
&c.,  of  the  ancient  writers.  From  this  part  of  his  system  Crates  derived 
the  surname  of  Kpm/cJs.  This  title  is  derived  by  some  from  the  fact  that, 
like  Aristarchus,  Crates  gave  the  greatest,  attention  to  the  Homeric 
poems  ;  from  his  labors  upon  which  he  was  also  surnamed  'O/j.-rjpiK6s. 
His  chief  work  is  entitled  &i6pdu<ns  'lAmSos  KOL  'OSyoWas,  in  nine  books, 
by  which  we  are  probably  to  understand,  not  a  recension  of  the  Homeric 
poems,  dividing  them  into  nine  books,  but  that  the  commentary  of  Crates 
itself  was  divided  into  nine  books.  The  few  fragments  of  this  comment 
ary  which  are  preserved  by  the  scholiasts  and  other  ancient  writers  have 
led  Wolf  to  express  a  very  unfavorable  opinion  of  Crates.  As  to  his 
emendations,  it  must  be  admitted  that  he  was  far  inferior  to  Aristarchus 
in  judgment  ;  but  it  is  equally  certain  that  he  was  most  ingenious  in  con 
jectural  emendations.  Several  of  his  readings  are  to  this  day  preferred 
by  the  best  scholars  to  those  of  Aristarchus.  As  for  his  excursions  into 
all  the  scientific  and  historical  questions  for  which  Homer  furnishes  an 
occasion,  it  was  the  direct  consequence  of  his  opinion  of  the  critic's  office 
that  he  should  undertake  them,  nor  do  the  results  of  his  inquiries  quite 
deserve  the  contempt  with  which  Wolf  treats  them. 

Among  the  ancients  themselves  Crates  enjoyed  a  reputation  little,  if  at 
all,  inferior  to  that  of  Aristarchus.  The  school  which  he  founded  at  Per- 
gamus  flourished  a  considerable  time,  and  was  the  subject  of  a  work  by 
Ptolemy  of  Ascalon,  entitled  wepl  rrjs  Kpar^Teiov  aipteecas.  To  this  school 
W7olf  refers  the  catalogues  of  ancient  writers  which  are  mentioned  by 
Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus.  Besides  his  work  on  Homer,  Crates  wrote 
commentaries  on  the  Theegony  of  Hesiod,  on  Euripides,  on  Aristophanes, 
a  work  on  the  Attic  dialect,  and  works  on  geography,  natural  history,  and 
agriculture,  of  all  which  only  a  few  fragments  exist.1 

The  fragments  of  Crates  are  collected  by  Wegener,  De  Aula  Attalica  Litt.  Artiumque 
fautrice,  Havniae,  1836,  8vo.  There  is  also  one  epigram  by  him  in  the  Greek  Anthol 
ogy,  upon  Chcerilus,  though  some  assign  this  to  an  epigrammatic  poet  of  the  same 
name. 


9.  ARTEMIDORUS  ('ApTe^tSco/ws),  surnamed  Aristophanius,  and  also  Pseu- 
do-Aristophanius,  from  his  being  a  disciple  of  the  celebrated  grammarian 
Aristophanes,  of  Byzantium,  was  himself  a  grammarian,  and  contempo 
rary  of  Aristarchus.  He  is  mentioned  by  Athenaeus2  as  the  author  of  a 
work  irepl  AcapiSos,  the  nature  of  which  is  not  clear,  and  of  Ae|«s  or  yA&o-- 
arai  tyaprvriKai,  that  is,  a  dictionary  of  technical  terms  and  expressions 
used  in  the  art  of  cookery.3  Some  MSS.  of  Theocritus  contain,  under 

'  Smith,  I.  c.  2  Atlun.,  iv.,  p.  182.  3  ja.,  i.,  p.  5  ;  ix.,  p.  387. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  417 

the  name  of  Artemidorus,  an  epigram  of  two  lines  on  the  collection  of 
bucolic  poems,  which  perhaps  belong  to  our  grammarian.1 

10.  SOSIBIUS  (2w<ri/8ios),  a  distinguished  Lacedaemonian  grammarian, 
who  flourished  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  (about  B.C.  251),  and 
was  contemporary  with  Callimachus.2     He  was  one  of  those  writers  who 
employed  themselves  in  solving  the  difficulties  met  with  in  the  ancient 
authors,  and  who  were  therefore  called  \VTIKOI  or  eViAvTiKo/,  in  opposition 
to  the  eVo-TOTtKoi,'  who  employed  their  ingenuity  in  proposing  problems  for 
others  to  solve.     Several  of  his  works  are  mentioned.     One  of  them,  but 
we  are  not  told  which,  contained  information  respecting  the  ancient  Do 
rian  comedy.     For  farther  information  concerning  him,  consult  Vossius, 
De  Hist.  Grac.,  p.  136,  seqq.,  ed.  Westermann. 

11.  PAL^EPHATUS  (naAcu<£aros),3  an  Egyptian  or  Athenian,  and  a  gram 
marian,  of  uncertain  date,  but  who  belongs,  very  probably,  to  the  period 
under  review.     His  most  celebrated  work  was  entitled  Tr&ica  (T/>wkK<£), 
and  is  frequently  referred  to  by  the  ancient  grammarians.     It  contained, 
apparently,  geographical  and  historical  discussions  respecting  Asia  Minor, 
and  more  particularly  its  northern  coasts,  and  must  have  been  divided 
into  several  books.     There  is  extant  a  small  work  entitled  riaAau^crros 
wepl  airio-Tui/,  or  "  Concerning  incredible  Tales,"  giving  a  brief  account  of 
some  of  the  most  celebrated  Greek  legends.     It  is  an  abstract  of  a  much 
larger  work,  which  is  lost.     It  was  the  original  work  to  which  Virgil4  re 
fers,  in  the  line  "  Docta  Palcephatia  testalur  voce  papyrus."     Palsephatus 
adopts  the  rationalistic  interpretation  of  the  myths,  according  to  the  semi- 
historical  theory.     By  various  ingenious  conjectures,  he  eliminates  from 
these  legends  all  the  incredible  circumstances,  and  leaves  to  us  a  string 
of  tales,  perfectly  credible  and  commonplace,  which  we  should  readily 
believe,  provided  a  very  moderate  amount  of  testimony  could  be  produced 
in  their  favor.     In  other  words,  we  arrive  at  matters  intrinsically  plausi 
ble,  but  totally  uncertified.5 

The  MSS.  of  the  Trepl  airia-Totv  present  the  greatest  discrepancies,  in  some  the  work 
being  much  longer,  and  in  others  much  shorter.  The  printed  editions,  in  like  manner, 
vary  considerably.  It  was  first  printed  by  Aldus  Manutius,  together  with  ^Esop,  Phur- 
nutus,  and  other  writers,  Venice,  1505,  fol.,  and  has  since  that  time  been  frequently  re 
printed.  The  following  is  a  list  of  the  principal  editions :  by  Tollius,  with  a  Latin 
translation  and  notes,  Amsterdam,  1649 ;  by  Brunner,  Upsala,  1663,  which  edition  was 
reprinted  with  improvements  under  the  care  of  Paulus  Pater,  Frankfort,  1685,  1686,  or 
1687,  for  these  three  years  appear  on  different  title-pages  ;  by  Thomas  Gale,  in  the  Opus- 
cula  Mythologica,  Cambridge,  1670,  reprinted  at  Amsterdam,  1688 ;  by  Dresig,  Leipzig, 
1735,  which  edition  was  frequently  reprinted  under  the  care  of  Fischer,  who  improved 
it  very  much,  and  who  published  a  sixth  edition  at  Leipzig,  1789 ;  by  Ernesti,  for  the 
use  of  schools,  Leipzig,  1816.  The  best  edition  of  the  text  is  by  Westermann,  in  the 
"  Mv0oypa(/)oi :  Scriptores  Poetics  Historic  Greed,"  Brunswick,  1843,  p.  268,  seqq. 

12.  DIDYMUS  (Ai'Su^os),6  a  celebrated  Alexandrean  grammarian  of  the 
time  of  Cicero  and  the  Emperor  Augustus,  and  who  belongs  therefore,  in 
fact,  partly  to  the  present  period  and  partly  to  the  succeeding  one.     He 
was  a  disciple,  or,  rather,  a  follower  of  the  school  of  Aristarchus,7  and 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Athen.,  xi.,  p.  493,  F;  iv.,  p.  144. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.      *  Ciris,  88.      5  Grote,  Hist,  of  Greece,  vol.  i.,  p.  553,  seqq. 

6  Smith,  Diet,  Biogr,,  s.  v.  7  Lchrs,  De  Aristarchi  stud.  Homer.,  p.  18,  seqq 


418  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

was  himself  the  teacher  of  Apion,  Heraclides  Ponticus,  and  other  eminent 
men  of  the  time.  He  is  commonly  distinguished  from  other  grammarians 
of  the  name  of  Didymus  by  the  surname  xaA/ceVrepos,  "of  brazen-bowels," 
which  he  is  said  to  have  received  from  his  indefatigable  and  unwearied 
application  to  study.  But  he  also  bore  the  nickname  of  j8ij8Ato\a0as,  for, 
owing  to  the  multitude  of  his  writings,  it  is  said  it  often  happened  to  him 
that  he  forgot  what  he  had  stated,  and  thus  in  his  later  productions  con 
tradicted  what  he  had  said  in  his  earlier  ones.  The  sum  total  of  his 
works  is  stated  by  Athenaeus1  to  have  been  3500,  and  by  Seneca,2  4000. 
In  this  calculation,  however,  single  books  or  rolls  seem  to  be  counted  as 
separate  works,  or  else  many  of  them  must  have  been  very  small  treat 
ises.  The  most  interesting  among  his  productions,  all  of  which  are  lost, 
would  have  been  those  in  which  he  treated  of  the  Homeric  poems,  the 
criticism  and  interpretation  of  which  formed  the  most  prominent  por 
tion  of  his  literary  pursuits.  The  greater  part  of  what  we  now  possess 
under  the  name  of  the  minor  scholia  on  Homer,  which  were  at  one  time 
considered. the  work  of  Didymus,  is  taken  from  the  several  works  which 
Didymus  wrote  upon  Homer.  Among  them  was  one  on  the  Homeric 
text  as  constituted  by  Aristarchus,  a  work  which  would  be  of  the  great 
est  importance  to  us,  as  he  entered  into  the  detail  of  the  criticisms  of 
Aristarchus,  and  revised  and  corrected  the  text  which  the  latter  had  es 
tablished. 

But  the  studies  of  Didymus  were  not  confined  to  Homer,  for  he  wrote 
also  commentaries  on  many  other  poets  and  prose  writers  of  the  classic 
al  times  of  Greece.  We  have  mention  of  works  of  his  on  the  lyric  poets, 
and  especially  on  Bacchylides  and  Pindar,  and  the  better  and  greater 
part  of  our  scholia  on  Pindar  is  taken  from  the  commentary  of  Didymus.3 
The  same  is  the  case  with  the  extant  scholia  on  Sophocles.  In  the  scho 
lia  on  Aristophanes,  too,  Didymus  is  often  referred  to,  and  we  farther 
know  that  he  wrote  commentaries  on  Euripides,  Ion,  Phrynichus,  Me- 
nander,  and  others.  The  Greek  orators,  Demosthenes,  Isaeus,  Hyperides, 
Dinarchus,  and  others,  were  likewise  commented  on  by  Didymus.  Nu 
merous  other  works  of  his  are  mentioned,  and  among  them  a  collection 
of  Greek  proverbs  in  thirteen  books,  from  which  is  taken  the  greater  part 
of  the  proverbs  contained  in  the  collection  of  Zenobius.  Didymus,  in 
fact,  stands  at  the  close  of  the  period  in  which  a  comprehensive  and  in 
dependent  study  of  Greek  literature  prevailed,  and  he  himself  must  be 
regarded  as  the  father  of  the  scholiasts  who  were  satisfied  with  compil 
ing  or  abridging  the  works  of  their  predecessors.  The  scholiasts  them 
selves  properly  belong  to  the  succeeding  or  Roman  period  of  Grecian  lit 
erature,  and  will  there  be  treated  of  by  us. 

i  Atfien.,  iv.,  p.  139.        2  Senec.,  Ep.,  88.        3  Bockh,  Prof,  ad  Sctol.  Find.,  p.  xvii.,  seq. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  419 


CHAPTER  XLIV. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD— continued. 
MATHEMATIC  S. A  S  T  R  O  N  O  M  Y. M  ECHANICS. 

THE  most  distinguished  mathematicians  during  this  period  were  Eu- 
CLIDES,  ARCHIMEDES,  and  APOLLONIUS  of  Perga.  The  most  eminent  as 
tronomers,  CONON,  of  Samos  ;  ARISTARCHUS,  of  the  same  island ;  ERATOS 
THENES  (distinguished  also  as  a  geometer),  and  HIPPARCHUS.  To  these 
we  may  add  the  mechanicians  CTESIBIUS,  HERO,  ATHEHMSUS,  BITON,  and 
PHILO  of  Byzantium. 

I.     MATHEMATICIANS. 

I.  EUCLIDES  (Eu/cAei'5?js),  of  Alexandrea,  was  a  celebrated  mathematician, 
who  has  almost  given  his  name  to  the  science  of  geometry  in  every  coun 
try  in  which  his  writings  are  studied,  but  of  whose  private  history  we 
know  next  to  nothing.  The  place  of  his  birth  is  uncertain.  He  lived  at 
Alexandrea  in  the  time  of  the  first  Ptolemy,  B.C.  323-283,1  and  was  the 
founder  of  the  Alexandrean  mathematical  school.  He  was  of  the  Pla 
tonic  sect,  and  well  read  in  its  doctrines.  It  was  he  who,  when  asked 
by  Ptolemy  if  geometry  could  not  be  made  easier,  replied  that  there  was 
no  royal  road  to  it  (/*}?  elvcu  j8a<ri\z/cV  fapairov  Trpbs  y^oi^rpiav).  Of  the 
numerous  works  attributed  to  Euclid  the  following  are  still  extant.  1. 
2rotx«aJ  "the  Elements,"  consisting  of  thirteen  books,  with  a  fourteenth 
and  fifteenth  added  by  Hypsicles,  of  Alexandrea,  about  170  A.D.  The 
first  four  and  the  sixth  are  on  plane  geometry ;  the  fifth  is  on  the  theory 
of  proportion,  and  applies  to  magnitude  in  general ;  the  seventh,  eighth, 
and  ninth  are  on  arithmetic  ;  the  tenth  is  on  the  arithmetical  characteris 
tics  of  the  divisions  of  a  straight  line ;  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  are  on 
the  elements  of  solid  geometry ;  the  thirteenth  (and  also  the  fourteenth 
and  fifteenth)  are  on  the  regular  solids,  which  were  so  much  studied 
among  the  Platonists  as  to  bear  the  name  of  Platonic,  and  which,  accord 
ing  to  Proclus,  were  the  objects  on  which  the  Elements  were  really 
meant  to  be  written.  This,  however,  can  not  be  a  correct  assertion. 
The  author  of  the  Elements  could  hardly  have  considered  them  a  mere 
introduction  to  a  favorite  speculation :  if  he  were  so  blind,  we  have  ev 
ery  reason  to  suppose  that  his  own  contemporaries  could  have  set  him 
right.  From  various  indications,  it  can  be  collected  that  the  fame  of  the 
Elements  was  almost  coeval  with  their  publication  ;  and  by  the  time  of 
Marinus  we  learn  from  that  writer  that  Euclid  was  called  Kvpios  <rrotx«- 
w-Hjs.2 

Next  in  order,  and  to  be  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  Elements 
are,  2.  The  Data  (AeSo/xeVa)  of  Euclid.  This  is  a  book  containing  a  hund 
red  propositions  of  a  peculiar  and  limited  intent.  It  is  the  most  valuable 

!  Proclus,  Ccr.im.  in  Eucl.,  ii.,  4,  *  De  Morgan ;  Smith,  Diet.  Viogr.^  s.  v. 


420  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

specimen  which  we  have  left  of  the  rudiments  of  the  geometrical  analy 
sis  of  the  Greeks.  Before  a  result  can  be  found,  it  should  be  known 
whether  the  given  hypotheses  are  sufficient  to  determine  it.  The  applica 
tion  of  algebra  settles  both  points ;  that  is,  ascertains  whether  one  or  more 
definite  results  can  be  determined  and  determines  them.  But  in  geome 
try  it  is  possible  to  propose  a  question  which  is  really  indeterminate,  and 
in  a  determinate  form,  while,  at  the  same  time,  the  methods  of  geometry 
which  give  one  answer  may  not  give  the  means  of  ascertaining  whether 
the  answer  thus  obtained  is  the  only  one.  Thus  the  two  following  ques 
tions  seem,  to  one  not  versed  in  geometry,  equally  to  require  one  spe 
cific  answer :  Given  the  area  of  a  parallelogram,  and  the  ratio  of  its  sides  ; 
required  the  lengths  of  those  sides :  and,  Given  the  area  of  a  parallelo 
gram,  the  ratio  of  its  sides  and  one  of  its  angles ;  required  the  lengths 
of  the  sides.  The  first  question  admits  of  an  infinite  number  of  answers, 
and  the  second  of  only  one  ;  or,  in  the  language  of  Euclid,  if  the  area,  ratio 
of  sides,  and  an  angle  of  a  parallelogram  be  given,  the  sides  themselves 
are  given.  The  same  process  by  which  it  may  be  shown  that  they  are 
given  serves  to  find  them ;  so  that  the  Data  of  Euclid  may  be  looked 
upon  as  a  collection  of  geometrical  problems,  in  which  the  attention  of 
the  reader  is  directed  more  to  the  question  of  the  sufficiency  of  the  hy 
pothesis  to  produce  one  result,  and  one  only,  than  to  the  method  of  ob 
taining  the  result.  A  preface  to  this  book  was  written  by  Marinus  of 
Naples.1 

Besides  the  Elements  and  Data  we  have,  3.  Elsayuyi]  'Apfiovt^,  a 
Treatise  on  Music  ;  and,  4.  Kara-ro^  Kavovos,  the  Division  of  the  Scale.  One 
of  these  works,  most  likely  the  former,  must  be  rejected.  5.  3?aii>6p.eva, 
the  Appearances  (of  the  heavens).  6.  'OimKa,  on  Optics ;  and,  7.  KUTOTT- 
rpiitd,  on  Catoptrics.  Proceeding  on  the  supposition  that  rays  of  light  are 
carried  from  the  eye  to  the  object,  the  first  of  these  two  books  demonstrates 
some  relations  of  apparent  magnitude,  and  shows  how  to  measure  an 
unknown  height  by  the  well-known  law  of  reflected  light.  In  the  second, 
an  imperfect  theory  of  convex  and  concave  mirrors  is  given. 

The  only  complete  edition  of  all  the  reputed  works  of  Euclid  is  that  published  at  Ox 
ford,  1703,  fol.,  Greek  and  Latin,  by  David  Gregory,  then  Savilian  professor,  with  the 
title  EuKAei'Sov  TO.  crwcjo/xeva.  The  Elements  and  the  Data  were  published  in  Greek,  Lat 
in,  and  French,  in  3  vols.  4to,  Paris,  1814-18,  by  Peyrard.  The  most  convenient  edition 
for  scholars  of  the  Greek  text  of  the  Elements  is  the  one  by  August,  Berlin,  1826,  8vo. 

II.  ARCHIMEDES  ('Apx'M^Srjs),2  the  most  celebrated  of  ancient  mathema 
ticians,  and  one  of  the  few  men  whose  writings  form  a  standard  epoch  in 
the  history  of  the  progress  of  knowledge,  was  born  at  Syracuse  B.C.  287. 
Of  his  family  little  is  known.  Plutarch  calls  him  a  relation  of  King  Hi 
ero,  but  he  would  seem  rather  to  have  been  merely  a  friend  of  that  mon 
arch,  and  not  of  elevated  origin.3  In  the  early  part  of  his  life  he  travelled 
into  Egypt,  where  he  is  said,  on  the  authority  of  Proclus,  to  have  studied 
under  Conon  the  Samian,  a  mathematician  and  astronomer,  who  lived 
under  the  Ptolemies,  Philadelphus  and  Euergetes,  and  for  whom  he  test- 

1  Penny  Cyclop.,  xi.,  p.  153.  2  Donkin ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Compare  Cid,  Tu*c.,v.,  23. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  421 

ifies  his  respect  and  esteem  in  several  places  of  his  works.  Livy  calls 
Archimedes  a  distinguished  astronomer,  "unicus  spectator  cosli  siderum- 
que,"1  a  description  the  truth  of  which  is  made  sufficiently  probable  by 
his  treatment  of  the  astronomical  questions  occurring  in  his  work  entitled 
the  Arenarius  (6  Vafj^irrjs).  He  was  popularly  best  known  as  the  invent 
or  of  several  ingenious  machines ;  but  Plutarch,8  who,  it  should  be  ob 
served,  confounds  the  application  of  geometry  to  mechanics  with  the 
solution  of  geometrical  problems  by  mechanical  means,  represents  him 
as  despising  these  contrivances,  and  only  condescending  to  withdraw 
himself  from  the  abstractions  of  pure  geometry  at  the  request  of  Hiero. 
Certain  it  is,  however,  that  Archimedes  did  cultivate  not  only  pure  ge 
ometry,  but  also  the  mathematical  theory  of  several  branches  of  physics, 
in  a  truly  scientific  spirit,  and  with  a  success  which  placed  him  very  far 
in  advance  of  the  age  in  which  he  lived.  His  theory  of  the  lever  was  the 
foundation  of  statics  till  the  discovery  of  the  composition  of  forces  in  the 
time  of  Newton,  and  no  essential  addition  was  made  to  the  principles  of 
the  equilibrium  of  fluids  and  floating  bodies,  established  by  him  in  his 
treatise  "  De  Insidentibus"  till  the  publication  of  Stevin's  researches  on 
the  pressure  of  fluids,  in  1608.3 

Archimedes  constructed  for  Hiero  various  engines  of  war,  which, 
many  years  afterward,  were  so  far  effectual  in  the  defence  of  Syracuse 
against  Marcellus  as  to  convert  the  siege  into  a  blockade,  and  delay  the 
taking  of  the  city  for  a  considerable  time.4  The  accounts  of  the  perform 
ances  of  these  engines  are  evidently  exaggerated  ;  and  the  story  of  the 
burning  of  the  Roman  ships  by  the  reflected  rays  of  the  sun,  though  very 
current  in  later  times,  is  probably  a  fiction,  since  neither  Polybius,  Livy, 
nor  Plutarch  gives  the  least  hint  of  it.  The  earliest  writers  who  speak 
of  it  are  Galen5  and  his  contemporary  Lucian,6  who  (in  the  second  cen 
tury)  merely  allude  to  it  as  a  thing  well  known.  Zonaras  (about  A.D. 
1100)  mentions  it  in  relating  the  employment  of  a  similar  apparatus,  con 
trived  by  a  certain  Proclus,  when  Byzantium  was  besieged  in  the  reign 
of  Anastasius  ;  and  gives  Dion  as  his  authority,  without  referring  to  the 
particular  passage.  The  extant  works  of  Dion  contain  no  allusion  to  it. 
Tzetzes7  (about  1150)  gives  an  account  of  the  principal  inventions  of 
Archimedes,  and  among  them  of  this  burning-machine,  which,  he  says, 
set  the  Roman  ships  on  fire,  when  they  came  within  a  bow-shot  of  the 
walls ;  and  consisted  of  a  large  hexagonal  mirror,  with  smaller  ones  dis 
posed  round  it,  each  of  the  latter  being  a  polygon  of  twenty-four  sides. 
The  subject  has  been  a  good  deal  discussed  in  modern  times,  especially 
by  Cavalieri  and  BufFon.  The  latter  writer  actually  succeeded  in  ignit 
ing  wood  at  a  distance  of  150  feet  by  means  of  a  combination  of  148 
plane  mirrors.  The  most  probable  conclusion  seems  to  be,that  Archim 
edes  had  on  some  occasion  set  fire  to  a  ship  or  ships  by  means  of  a  burn 
ing-mirror,  and  that  later  writers  falsely  connected  the  circumstance 
with  the  siege  of  Syracuse. 

i  Liv.,  xxiv.,  2.     '  2  Plut.,  Marcell.,  14. 

3  Lagrarig-e,  Mec.  Anal.,  vol.  i.,  p.  ii.,  176.  *  Id.  ib.,  15,  seqq. 

3  Galen,  DC  Temp'crt,  iii,,  2,       «  Lucian,  HippiO3j  c.  2.       '  Tzetz,,  CM.,  ii.,  103,  seqq. 


422 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


But,  whatever  we  may  think  of  the  story  of  the  mirrors,  one  thing  is 
certain,  that  the  military  engines  of  Archimedes,  generally,  were  a  pow 
erful  means  of  defence  to  the  beleaguered  city.  Polybius  states  that  cat 
apults  and  balistse  of  various  sizes  were  successfully  used  against  the  en 
emy  ;  that  in  their  nearer  approach  they  were  galled  by  arrows  shot  not 
only  from  the  top  of  the  walls,  but  through  port-holes  constructed  in  nu 
merous  places  ;  that  machines  which  threw  masses  of  stone  or  lead,  of 
a  weight  not  less  than  ten  talents,  discharged  their  contents  on  the  Ro 
man  engines,  which  had  been  previously  caught  by  ropes  ;  that  iron  hands 
(maniis  ferrea)  or  hooks,  attached  to  chains,  were  thrown  so  as  to  catch 
the  prows  of  the  vessels,  which  were  then  overturned  by  the  besieged, 
and  that  the  same  machines  were  used  to  catch  the  assailants  on  the 
land  side,  and  dash  them  to  the  ground. 

After  the  storming  of  Syracuse,  Archimedes  was  killed  by  a  Roman 
soldier,  who  did  not  know  who  he  was.  Marcellus,  it  is  said,  had  given 
strict  orders  to  preserve  him  alive.  According  to  Valerius  Maximus, 
when  the  soldier  asked  who  he  was,  Archimedes,  being  intent  upon  a 
problem,  begged  that  his  diagram  might  not  be  disturbed ;  upon  which 
the  soldier  put  him  to  death.  According  to  another  account,  he  was  in 
the  act  of  carrying  his  instruments  to  Marcellus,  when  he  was  killed  by 
some  soldiers,  who  suspected  that  the  box  which  he  was  carrying  con 
tained  treasure  which  he  was  endeavoring  to  remove.  At  his  own  re 
quest,  expressed  during  his  life,  a  sphere  inscribed  in  a  cylinder  was  en 
graved  on  his  tomb,  in  memory  of  his  discovery  that  the  solid  content  of 
a  sphere  is  exactly  two  thirds  of  that  of  the  circumscribing  cylinder.  By 
this  mark  it  was  afterward  found,  covered  with  weeds,  by  Cicero,  when 
quaestor  in  Sicily. 

The  following  additional  instances  of  the  skill  of  Archimedes  in  the 
application  of  science  may  here  be  mentioned.  He  detected  the  mixture 
of  silver  in  a  crown  which  Hiero  had  ordered  to  be  made  of  gold,  and  de 
termined  the  proportion  of  the  two  metals  by  a  method  suggested  to  him 
by  the  overflowing  of  the  water  when  he  stepped  into  a  bath.  When  the 
thought  struck  him,  he  is  said  to  have  been  so  much  pleased,  that,  forget 
ting  to  put  on  his  clothes,  he  ran  home,  shouting  efy^/ca,  evpr]Ka.  The 
particulars  of  the  calculation  are  not  preserved,  but  it  probably  depended 
upon  a  direct  comparison  of  the  weights  of  certain  volumes  of  silver  and 
gold  with  the  weight  and  volume  of  the  crown  ;  the  volumes  being  meas 
ured,  at  least  in  the  case  of  the  crown,  by  the  quantity  of  water  displaced 
when  the  mass  was  immersed.  It  is  not  likely  that  Archimedes  was  at 
this  time  acquainted  with  the  theorems  demonstrated  in  his  hydrostatical 
treatise  concerning  the  loss  of  weight  of  bodies  immersed  in  water,  since 
he  would  hardly  have  evinced  such  lively  gratification  at  the  obvious  dis 
covery  that  they  might  be  applied  to  the  problem  of  the  crown ;  his  de 
light  must  rather  have  arisen  from  his  now  first  catching  sight  of  a  line 
of  investigation  which  led  immediately  to  the  solution  of  the  problem  in 
question,  and  ultimately  to  the  important  theorems  referred  to.1 

He  superintended  the  building  of  a  ship  of  enormous  size  for  Hiero,  of 
•  ....  . 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD. 


423 


which  a  description  is  given  in  Athenasus,'  where  he  is  also  said  to  have 
moved  it  to  the  sea  by  the  help  of  a  screw.  According  to  Proclus,  this 
ship  was  intended  by  Hiero  as  a  present  to  Ptolemy  ;  and  it  may  possibly 
have  been  the  occasion  of  Archimedes'  visit  to  Egypt.  He  invented,  also, 
a  machine  called,  from  its  form,  Cochlea,  and  now  known  as  the  water- 
screw  of  Archimedes,  for  pumping  the  water  out  of  the  hold  of  this  ves 
sel  ;  it  is  said  to  have  been  also  used  in  Egypt  by  the  inhabitants  of  the 
Delta  in  irrigating  their  lands.2  The  Arabian  historian  Abulpharagius 
attributes  to  Archimedes  the  raising  of  the  dikes  and  bridges  used  as 
defences  against  the  overflowing  of  the  Nile.3  Tzetzes  and  Oribasius4 
speak  of  his  Trispast,  a  machine  for  moving  large  weights ;  probably  a 
combination  of  pulleys,  or  wheels  and  axles.  A  hydraulic  organ  is  men 
tioned  by  Tertullian,  which  Pliny,  however,  attributes  to  Ctesibius.  An 
apparatus  called  loculus,  apparently  somewhat  resembling  the  Chinese 
puzzle,  is  also  attributed  to  Archimedes.  His  most  celebrated  perform 
ance,  ho\\  ever,  was  the  construction  of  a  sphere,  a  kind  of  orrery,  repre 
senting  the  movements  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  of  which  we  have  no  par 
ticular  description.  The  apophthegm  attributed  to  him,  that  if  he  had  a 
point  to  stand  upon  he  could  move  the  world  (5bs  irov  errcD,  KOI  rbv  KOO-^QV 
Kivf)a-<i)),  arose  from  his  knowledge  of  the  possible  effects  of  machinery, 
and,  however  it  might  astonish  a  Greek  of  his  day,  would  now  be  admit 
ted  to  be  as  theoretically  possible  as  it  is  practically  impossible. 

Of  the  general  character  of  Archimedes  we  have  no  direct  account. 
But  his  apparently  disinterested  devotion  to  his  friend  and  admirer  Hie 
ro,  in  whose  service  he  was  ever  ready  to  exercise  his  ingenuity  upon 
objects  which  his  own  taste  would  not  have  led  him  to  choose  (for  there 
is  doubtless  some  truth  in  what  Plutarch  says  on  this  point) ;  the  affec 
tionate  regret  which  he  expresses  for  his  deceased  master  Conon,  in 
writing  to  his  surviving  friend  Dositheus  (to  whom  most  of  his  works  are 
addressed) ;  and  the  unaffected  simplicity  with  which  he  announces  his 
own  discoveries,  seem  all  to  afford  probable  grounds  for  a  favorable  esti 
mate  of  it.  That  his  intellect  was  of  the  very  highest  order  is  unques 
tionable.  He  possessed,  in  a  degree  never  exceeded,  unless  by  Newton, 
the  inventive  genius  which  discovers  new  provinces  of  inquiry,  and  finds 
new  points  of  view  for  old  and  familiar  objects  ;  the  clearness  of  concep 
tion  which  is  essential  to  the  resolution  of  complex  phenomena  into  their 
constituent  elements;  and  the  power  and  habit  of  intense  and  persevering 
thought,  without  which  other  intellectual  gifts  are  comparatively  fruitless. 
It  may  be  noticed  that  he  resembled  other  great  thinkers  in  his  habit  of 
complete  abstraction  from  outward  things  when  reflecting  on  subjects 
which  made  considerable  demands  on  his  mental  powers.  At  such  times 
he  would  forget  to  eat  his  meals,  and  required  compulsion  to  take  him  to 
the  bath.  The  success  of  Archimedes  in  conquering  difficulties  seems 
to  have  made  the  expression  irpdpx-n/j.a  'Apxip--fi8(tov  proverbial.5 

The  following  works  of  Archimedes  have  come  down  to  us :    1.  A 

1  Athen.,  v.,  p.  206,  D.  8  Diod.  Sic.,  L,  34  ;  Vitruv.,  X.,  11. 

3  Pope-Bloimt,  Censura,  p.  32.  *  DC  Much,,  xxvi. 

*  Ccrrparc  do.,  Ep.  ad  Att.,  xii:,.  2S ;  cro  Clucnt.,  32. 


424 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


treatise  on  Equilibrium  and  Centre  of  Gravity  of  Planes  ("EiriireSai/  l<roppoTri- 
K&V  ri  Kej/rpa  fiap&v  eirnreSwv),  in  which  the  theory  of  the  equilibrium  of  the 
straight  lever  is  demonstrated,  both  for  commensurable  and  incommen 
surable  weights  ;  and  various  properties  of  the  centres  of  gravity  of  plane 
surfaces  bounded  by  three  or  four  straight  lines,  or  by  a  straight  line  and 
a  parabola,  are  established.  2.  The  Quadrature  of  the  Parabola  (Terpaywi/- 
i(r/j.bs  7ra/jaj8oA.??s),  in  which  it  is  proved  that  the  area  cut  off  from  a  parab 
ola  by  any  chord  is  equal  to  two  thirds  of  the  parallelogram  of  which  one 
side  is  the  chord  in  question,  and  the  opposite  side  a  tangent  to  the  par 
abola.  This  was  the  first  real  example  of  the  quadrature  of  a  curvilinear 
space  ;  that  is,  of  the  discovery  of  a  rectilinear  figure  equal  to  an  area  not 
bounded  entirely  by  straight  lines.  3.  A  treatise  on  the  Sphere  and  Cyl 
inder  (Uepl  TTJS  ~2,<paipas  /cat  KuAtVSpou),  in  which  various  propositions  rela 
tive  to  the  surfaces  and  volumes  of  the  sphere,  cylinder,  and  cone  were 
demonstrated  for  the  first  time.  Many  of  them  are  now  familiarly  known ; 
for  example,  those  which  establish  the  ratio  (3)  between  the  volumes, 
and  also  between  the  surfaces  of  the  sphere  and  circumscribing  cylinder ; 
and  the  ratio-(i)  between  the  area  of  a  great  circle  and  the  surface  of  the 
sphere.  They  are  easily  demonstrable  by  the  modern  analytical  methods ; 
but  the  original  discovery  and  geometrical  proof  of  them  required  the  ge 
nius  of  Archimedes.  Moreover,  the  legitimacy  of  the  modern  applica 
tions  of  analysis  to  questions  concerning  curved  lines  and  surfaces  can 
only  be  proved  by  a  kind  of  geometrical  reasoning,  of  which  Archimedes 
gave  the  first  example.1 

4.  A  work  on  the  Dimension  of  the  Circle  (Ku/cAov  jueTp^cny),  consisting 
of  three  propositions.  1st.  Every  circle  is  equal  to  a  right-angled  trian 
gle,  of  which  the  sides  containing  the  right  angle  are  equal  respectively 
to  its  radius  and  circumference.  2d.  The  ratio  of  the  area  of  the  circle 
to  the  square  of  its  diameter  is  nearly  that  of  eleven  to  fourteen.  3d. 
The  circumference  of  the  circle  is  greater  than  three  times  its  diameter 
by  a  quantity  greater  than  i^  of  the  diameter,  but  less  than  \  of  the 
same.  The  last  two  propositions  are  established  by  comparing  the  cir 
cumference  of  the  circle  with  the  perimeters  of  the  inscribed  and  circum 
scribed  polygons  of  ninety-six  sides.  5.  A  treatise  on  Spirals  (irepl  'EAi- 
/ca>»>).  containing  demonstrations  of  the  principal  properties  of  the  curve, 
now  known  as  the  Spiral  of  Archimedes,  which  is  generated  by  the  uni 
form  motion  of  a  point  along  a  straight  line,  revolving  uniformly  in  one 
plane  about  one  of  its  extremities.  It  appears  from  the  introductory 
epistle  to  Dositheus  that  Archimedes  had  not  been  able  to  put  these  the 
orems  in  a  satisfactory  form  without  long-continued  and  repeated  trials ; 
and  that  Conon,  to  whom  he  had  sent  them  as  problems  along  with  vari 
ous  others,  had  died  without  accomplishing  their  solution.  6.  A  treatise 
on  Obtuse  Conoids  and  Spheroids  (-rrfpl  ap.fi\vywv<.uv  Kuvoeidfuv  Kal  tr^yua- 
rcav  o-^atpoetSeW),  relating  chiefly  to  the  volumes  cut  off  by  planes  from 
the  solids,  so  called ;  those,  namely,  which  are  generated  by  the  rotation 
of  the  conic  sections  about  their  principal  axes.  Like  the  work  last  de 
scribed,  it  was  the  result  of  laborious  and  at  first  unsuccessful  attempts. 
1  Compare  Z'sfcrc'j'r,  Pij?.  Cal ,  vtjl,  {.,  p,  63  and  431  > 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  425 


7.  The  Arenarius  (6  Yoju/Jnjs)  is  a  short  tract,  addressed  to  Gelo,  the 
eldest  son  of  Hiero,  in  which  Archimedes  proves  that  it  is  possible  to  as 
sign  a  greater  number  than  that  of  the  grains  of  sand,  which  would  fill 
.  the  sphere  of  the  fixed  stars.  This  singular  investigation  was  suggested 
by  an  opinion  which  some  persons  had  expressed,  that  the  sands  on  the 
shores  of  Sicily  were  either,  or,  at  least,  would  exceed  any  numbers 
which  could  be  assigned  for  them  ;  and  the  success  with  which  the  diffi 
culties  caused  by  the  awkw  v.  d  and  imperfect  notation  of  the  ancient 
Greek  arithmetic  are  eluded,  by  a  device  identical  in  principle  with  the 
modern  method  of  logarithms,  affords  one  of  the  most  striking  instances  of 
the  great  mathematician's  genius.  Having  briefly  discussed  the  opinions 
of  Aristarchus  upon  the  constitution  and  extent  of  the  universe,  and  de 
scribed  his  own  method  of  determining  the  apparent  diameter  of  the  sun, 
and  the  magnitude  of  the  pupil  of  the  eye,  he  is  led  to  assume  that  the 
diameter  of  the  sphere  of  the  fixed  stars  may  be  taken  as  not  exceeding 
100  million  of  millions  of  stadia  ;  and  that  a  sphere  one  $a.KTv\o$  in  diam 
eter  can  not  contain  more  than  640  millions  of  grains  of  sand  ;  then,  tak 
ing  the  stadium,  in  round  numbers,  as  not  greater  than  10,000  5aKTuA.cn, 
he  shows  that  the  number  of  grains  in  question  could  not  be  so  great  as 
1000  myriads  multiplied  by  the  eighth  term  of  a  geometrical  progression, 
of  which  the  first  term  was  unity,  and  the  common  ratio  a  myriad  of 
myriads  ;  a  number  which,  in  our  notation,  would  be  expressed  by  unity 
with  sixty-three  ciphers  annexed.1 

8.  The  treatise  on  Floating  bodies  (irepi  TU>V  'Oxoi^eVai/),  in  two  books, 
containing  demonstrations  of  the  laws  which  determine  the  position  of 
bodies  immersed  in  water,  and  particularly  of  segments  of  spheres  and 
parabolic  conoids.  These  books  are  extant  only  in  the  Latin  version  of 
Commandine,  writh  the  exception  of  a  fragment,  -n-fpl  T&V  vdari  e^crraueVcoi/, 
in  Mai's  collection,  vol.  i.,  p.  427.  9.  The  treatise  called  Lemmata,  a  col 
lection  of  fifteen  propositions  in  plane  geometry.  It  is  derived  from  an 
Arabic  MS.,  and  its  genuineness  has  been  doubted. 

The  works  of  Archimedes  are  written  in  Doric  Greek,  the  prevailing 
dialect  in  Sicily.  The  text  is,  for  the  most  part,  in  tolerably  good  preser 
vation  ;  the  style  is  clear,  and  has  been  considered  better  than  that  of 
any  of  the  other  Greek  geometers.  The  demonstrations  are  long  but 
rigorous,  and  Peyrard,  in  calling  Archimedes  the  Homer  of  geometry,  has 
made  a  simile  which  is  perfectly  admissible  as  to  the  strength  of  praise 
it  conveys,  if  in  no  other  point.  Eutocius  of  Ascalon,  about  A.D.  600. 
wrote  a  commentary  on  the  treatises  on  the  SpJtere  and  Cylinder,  on  the 
Dimensions  of  the  Circle,  and  on  Centres  of  Gravity. 

There  are  some  Arabic  manuscripts  which  n/ofess  to  contain  writings  of  Archimedes, 
and  there  are  said  to  be  lost  the  following  works:  'Apxa-t,  'Er/>6§ioi>,  Ilepl  ZvyCov,  Mrjxaf- 
i/ca  (though  it  is  doubted  whether  this  be  not  the  same  with  the  treatise  on  Equiponder 
ants,  &c.,  already  mentioned),  Tlepi  2<£aipo7roua?,  also  a  work  on  the  inscription  of  a 
heptagon  in  a  circle,  and  another  (very  doubtful)  on  conic  sections.  Proclus  mentions 
the  2<£aipo7roua,  and  says  it  described  an  imitation  of  the  celestial  motions.  Archime 
des  was  an  observer  of  the  heavens,  and  his  observations  of  the  solstices  are  mentioned 
with  praise  by  Ptolemy. 

»  Donkin,  I.  c. 


426  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

All  the  extant  works  of  Archimedes,  together  with  the  commentary  of  Eutocius,  were 
brought  from  Constantinople,  in  manuscript,  on  the  fall  of  that  city,  and  were  conveyed 
first  into  Italy,  and  then  into  Germany,  by  Regiomontanus,  who  made  many  emenda 
tions.  The  first  edition  was  printed  at  Basle,  1544,  Greek  and  Latin,  by  Hervagius,  ed 
ited  by  Gechauff,  called  Venatorius.  The  commentaries  of  Eutocius,  Greek  and  Latin, 
are  also  added.  After  this  we  have  Rivault's  edition,  Paris,  1615,  fol.  It  is,  however, 
all  in  Latin,  except  that  the  Greek  is  added  to  the  enunciations  throughout,  and  to  the 
whole  of  the  Arenarius.  The  scholia  are  often  taken  from  Eutocius,  but  that  commenta 
tor  is  not  added  complete.  The  best  edition  by  far,  however,  is  that  of  Torelli,  Oxford, 
1793,  fol.,  containing  all  the  extant  works  of  Archimedes,  together  with  the  commenta 
ries  of  Eutocius.  The  University  of  Oxford  purchased  this  edition  of  the  executors  of 
Joseph  Torelli,  of  Verona.  It  was  founded  upon  the  Basle  edition,  except  in  the  case  of 
the  Arenarius,  the  text  of  which  is  taken  from  that  of  Dr.  Wallis,  who  published  this 
treatise  and  the  one  on  the  Dimension  of  the  Circle,  with  a  translation  and  notes,  Oxford, 
1679.  They  are  reprinted  in  vol.  iii.  of  his  works.  A  French  translation  of  the  works 
of  Archimedes,  with  notes,  was  published  by  Peyrard,  Paris,  1807,  4to,  and  1808,  2  vols 
8vo.  There  is  also  a  German  version,  with  critical  and  explanatory  notes,  by  Nizze, 
Stralsund,  1824,  8vo. 


III.  APOLLONIUS  ('ATroAX^os),1  surnamed  Pcrgaus,  from  Perga,  in 
Pamphylia,  his  native  city,  a  celebrated  mathematician,  educated  at  Al- 
exandrea,  under  the  successors  of  Euclid.  He  was  born  in  the  reign  of 
Ptolemy  Euergetes,2  and  died  under  Philopator,  who  reigned  B.C.  222- 
205.  3  He  was,  therefore,  probably  about  forty  years  younger  than  Ar 
chimedes.  Eutocius,  his  commentator,  states  that  while  living  he  was 
called  "the  great  geometer,"*  on  account  of  his  discoveries  in  conic  sec 
tions;.  This  title  belongs  rather  to  Archimedes  ;  but  Apollonius  lived  in 
Alexandrea,  the  geometrical  capital,  and  Archimedes  in  Sicily,  the  "  Ul 
tima  Thule"  of  all  science.  Nothing  more  is  known  of  his  life.  Apollo 
nius  is  also  mentioned  by  Ptolemy  as  an  astronomer,  and  he  is  said  to 
have  been  called  by  the  sobriquet  of  e  (epsilon),  ffom  his  fondness  for  ob 
serving  the  moon,  the  shape  of  which  was  supposed  to  resemble  that  let 
ter.  Ptolemy  has  preserved  his  theorems  on  the  stationary  points  of  the 
planets,  and  we  must  suppose  that  he  was  the  first  who  solved  the  prob-« 
lem  of  finding  the  stationary  points,  and  the  arc  of  retrogradation,  on  the 
epicyclic  hypothesis,  which,  though  it  now  bears  the  name  of  Ptolemy, 
had  been  struck  out  by  Hipparchus. 

Apollonius's  most  important  work,  the  only  considerable  one  which  has 
come  down  to  our  time,  was  a  treatise  on  conic  sections,  in  eight  books. 
Of  these  the  first  four,  with  the  commentary  of  Eutocius,  are  extant  in 
Greek,  and  all  but  the  eighth  in  Arabic.  The  eighth  book  seems  to  have 
been  lost  before  the  date  of  the  Arabic  versions.  We  have,  also,  intro 
ductory  lemmas  to  all  the  eight  by  Pappus.  The  first  four  books  proba 
bly  contain  little  more  than  the  substance  of  what  former  geometers  had 
done  ;  they  treat  of  the  definitions  and  elementary  properties  of  the  conic 
sections,  of  their  diameters,  tangents,  asymptotes,  mutual  intersections, 
and  so  forth.  But  Apollonius  seems  to  lay  claim  to  originality  in  most 
of  what  follows.  The  fifth  treats  of  the  longest  and  shortest  right  lines 
(in  other  words,  the  normals')  which  can  be  drawn  from  a  given  point  to 
the  curve.  The  sixth  of  the  equality  and  similarity  of  conic  sections  ; 

1  Donkin;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Eutocius,  Comm.  in  Ap.  Con.,  lib.  i. 

3  HephcBst.  ap.  Phot.,  Cod.  cxc.  *  Eutoc.,  I.  c. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  427 

and  the  seventh  relates  chiefly  to  their  diameters,  and  rectilinear  figures 
described  upon  them.1 

We  learn  from  Eutocius2  that  Heraclius,  in  his  life  of  Archimedes,  ac 
cused  Apollonius  of  having  appropriated  to  himself  in  this  work  the  un 
published  discoveries  of  that  great  mathematician.  However  this  may 
have  been,  there  is  truth  in  the  reply  quoted  by  the  same  author  from 
Geminus,  that  neither  Archimedes  nor  Apollonius  pretended  to  have  in 
vented  this  branch  of  geometry,  but  that  Apollonius  had  introduced  a 
real  improvement  into  it.  For  whereas  Archimedes,  according  to  the 
ancient  method,  considered  only  the  section  of  a  right  cone  by  a  plane 
perpendicular  to  its  side,  so  that  the  species  of  the  curve  depended  upon 
the  angle  of  the  cone  ;  Apollonius  took  a  more  general  view,  conceiving 
the  curve  to  be  produced  by  the  intersection  of  any  plane  with  a  cone 
generated  by  a  right  line  passing  always  through  the  circumference  of  a 
fixed  circle  and  any  fixed  point. 

Apollonius  was  the  author  of  several  other  works.  The  following  are 
described  by  Pappus,  in  the  seventh  book  of  his  "  Mathematical  Collec 
tions." 

1.  Ilepl  \6yov  aTroTOjUTjs,  and  Trepl  xwpiov  OTTOTOJIXTJS,  in  which  it  was  shown 
how  to  draw  a  line  through  a  given  point  so  as  to  cut  segments  from 
two  given  lines :  1st,  in  a  given  ratio ;  3d,  containing  a  given  rectan 
gle.  Of  the  first  of  these  an  Arabic  version  is  still  extant,  of  which  a 
translation  was  edited  by  Halley,  with  a  conjectural  restoration  of  the 
second,  Oxford,  1706.  2.  Ilepl  Sicapia-/j.fvns  TOWS.  To  find  a  point  in  a 
given  straight  line  such  that  the  rectangle  of  its  distances  from  two  given 
points  in  the  same  should  fulfill  certain  conditions.  A  solution  of  this 
problem  was  published  by  Robert  Simson.  3.  Uepi  r6iruv  fimr^wv.  "A 
treatise  in  two  books  on  Plane  Loci.  Restored  by  Robert  Simson,"  Glas 
gow,  1749.  4.  Uepl  eVa^i/,  DC  Tactionibus,  in  which  it  was  proposed  to 
draw  a  circle  fulfilling  any  three  of  the  conditions  of  passing  through  one 
or  more  of  three  given  points,  and  touching  one  or  more  of  three  given 
circles  and  three  given  straight  lines.  Or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  to 
draw  a  circle  touching  three  given  circles  whose  radii  may  have  any 
magnitude,  including  zero  and  infinity.  There  is  an  edition  of  the  re 
mains  of  this  work  by  Camerer,  Apollonii  de  Tactionibus  qua  supersunt, 
Gotha  and  Amst.,  1795,  8vo.  5.  Tlepl  vetxreaiv,  DC  Inclinationibus .  To 
draw  through  a  given  point  a  right  line  so  that  a  given  portion  of  it 
should  be  intercepted  between  two  given  right  lines.  Restored  by  Hors- 
ley,  Oxford,  1770.  Proclus,  in  his  commentary  on  Euclid,  mentions  two 
treatises,  De  Cochlea  and  De  Perturbatis  Rationibus.  Eutocius,  in  his 
commentary  on  the  Dimensio  Circuli  of  Archimedes,  mentions  an  arith 
metical  work  called  'flfcur^ooi/  (see  Wallis,  Op.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  559),  which  is 
supposed  to  be  referred  to  in  a  fragment  of  the  second  book  of  Pappus, 
edited  by  Wallis.3  This  word  has  puzzled  the  commentators.  Apollo 
nius,  in  the  work  in  question,  extended  the  quadrature  of  the  circle  given 
by  Archimedes. 

Up  to  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  nothing  of  Apollonius  was  known  except- 
i  Donkin,  1.  c.  2  Comm.,  in  lib.  i.  3  Op.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  597. 


428 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


ing  the  first  four  books  of  the  Conic  Sections,  which  had  come  down  in  Greek,  with  the 
commentary  of  Eutocius  in  the  same  language.  Of  these,  one  Latin  translation  had 
appeared  at  Venice  in  1537,  by  J.  B.  Memus ;  another,  by  Commandine,  at  Bologna,  in 
1566;  and  a  third,  of  little  note,  by  the  Jesuit  Claude  Richard,  at  Antwerp,  in  1655. 
Translations  had  been  made  into  Arabic,  which  were  to  be  found  in  European  libraries, 
but  had  not  been  looked  for.  About  the  middle  of  that  century,  James  Golius,  professor 
of  Oriental  languages  at  Leyden,  returned  from  the  East  with  abundance  of  Oriental 
manuscripts,  and,  among  others,  with  seven  books  of  the  Conic  Sections.  But  it  so  hap 
pened  that,  in  1658,  before  Golius  had  published  any  thing,  Alfonso  Borelli  found,  among 
the  manuscripts  which  had  been  removed  by  purchase  from  the  Medicean  library  to  that 
of  Florence,  an  Arabic  writing  with  the  Latin  title  "Apollonii  Pergasi  Conicorum  Libri 
Octo."  This  manuscript,  which  professed  to  be  a  translation  by  Abalphat  of  Ispahan, 
on  being  examined,  by  the  assistance  of  some  Maronites  then  at  Florence,  turned  out  to 
agree  with  the  Greek  in  the  four  books  which  were  common  to  both,  and  was  accord 
ingly  acknowledged  as  a  genuine  translation.  But  it  only  contained  seven  books,  and  a 
note  on  the  manuscript  which  Golius  brought  to  Europe  stated  that  no  Arabian  transla 
tor  had  ever  found  more  than  seven  books.  But  (according  to  Golius,  as  cited  by  Mer- 
senne)  Aben  Eddin,  a  learned  bibliographer,  states  that  he  had  seen  a  part  of  the  eighth 
book  in  Arabic,  and  also  that  he  had  seen,  in  the  same  language,  all  the  works  of  Apol- 
lonius  mentioned  by  Pappus,  and  more.  The  Maronites  above  mentioned  recommended 
that  the  translation  should  be  intrusted  to  Abraham  Ecchellensis  (so  his  name,  whatever 
it  was,  had  been  Latinized),  another  Maronite  then  at  Rome,  and  a  distinguished  teacher 
of  Oriental  languages.  Accordingly,  Borelli  and  Ecchellensis  completed  the  translation 
of  the  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  books,  and  published  it  at  Florence  in  1661.  Ravius  also 
published  a  translation  of  the  same,  from  the  Arabic  of  one  Abdu-1-malek,  at  Kiel  (Kilo- 
mum),  in  1669.  This  translation  Halley  terms  barbarous.1 

But  the  best  edition  of  Apollonius,  and  the  only  one  which  contains  the  Greek  as  far 
as  it  goes,  is  the  folio  published  at  Oxford  in  1710,  by  Halley.  Gregory,  who  began  it, 
died  before  much  progress  had  been  made.  Halley  had  previously,  as  we  have  before 
stated,  published  at  Oxford,  in  1706,  8vo,  from  the  Arabic,  the  treatise  nepl  \6yov  cbro- 
TO/ATJS.  The  edition  of  1710  contains  the  four  books  and  the  commentary  of  Eutocius,  in 
Greek  and  Latin  ;  the  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  books,  in  Halley's  translation  from  the 
Arabic ;  and  Halley's  attempt  at  a  restitution  of  the  eighth  book  from  the  preliminary 
lemmas  given  by  Pappus.  It  also  contains  the  two  books  of  Serenus  on  the  cone  and 
cylinder.  Some  of  the  editions,  or  attempted  restorations  of  individual  works,  have  al 
ready  been  mentioned.2 

II.     ASTRONOMERS. 

I.  CONON  (K^coj/),3  a  native  of  Samos,  a  mathematician  and  astrono 
mer,  lived  in  the  time  of  the  Ptolemies,  Philadelphia  and  Euergetes  (B.C. 
285-222),  and  was  the  friend  and  probably  the  teacher  of  Archimedes, 
who  survived  him.  None  of  his  works  are  preserved.  His  observations 
are  referred  to  by  Ptolemy,  in  his  4>a<ms  airAcwwy,  and  in  the  historical 
notice  appended  to  that  work  they  are  said  to  have  been  made  in  Italy,* 
in  which  country  he  seems  to  have  been  celebrated.5  According  to  Sen 
eca,6  he  made  a  collection  of  the  observations  of  solar  eclipses  preserved 
by  the  Egyptians.  Apollonius  Pergseus  mentions  his  attempt  to  demon 
strate  some  propositions  concerning  the  number  of  points  in  which  two 
conic  sections  can  cut  one  another.  Conon  is  said  to  have  given  its 
name  to  the  constellation  called  Coma  Berenices,  on  the  authority  of  an 
ode  of  Callimachus,  translated  by  Catullus,  a  fragment  of  the  original  of 
which  is  preserved  by  Theon  in  his  scholia  on  Aratus.  It  is  doubtful, 

1   Diet.  Biog.jSoc.  D.  U.  K.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  174.  2  Ibid. 

3  Donkin:  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Petav.,  Uranolog.,  p.  93. 

5  Compare  Virg.,  Eclog.,  iii.,  40.  6  Nat.  Qiuest.,  vii.,  3. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  429 

however,  whether  this  constellation  was  really  adopted  by  the  Alexan- 
drean  astronomers. 

II.  ARISTARCHUS  ('Apia-Tapxos),1  of  Samos,  a  distinguished  astronomer 
of  the  Alexandrean  school.  We  know  little  of  his  history  except  that  he 
was  living  between  B.C.  280  and  264.  His  name  is  preserved  by  one 
remaining  work,  containing  one  true  method,  and  by  a  report  that  he 
maintained  the  motion  of  the  earth.  The  work  in  question,  on  which 
Pappus  has  left  a  commentary,  is  entitled  Trtpl  peytQw  Kal  a.Troa-Ttjfj.dTcav 
y\iov  Kal  a-€\.-fivr]s,  "  On  the  Magnitudes  and  Distances  of  the  Sun  and 
Moon."  The  method  proves  that  Aristarchus  had  a  correct  idea  of  the 
cause  of  the  moon's  phases.  When  the  moon  appears  exactly  halved,  the 
line  joining  the  eye  and  the  moon's  centre  is  at  right  angles  to  that  join 
ing  the  centres  of  the  sun  and  moon.  In  the  triangle  E  M  S,  then  (E  be 
ing  the  spectator's  eye,  M  the  moon's  centre,  and  S  the  sun's  centre), 
the  angle  E  M  S  is  a  right  angle,  and  the  angle  M  E  S  is  that  known  by 
the  name  of  the  elongation  of  the  moon  from  the  sun,  and  can  be  meas 
ured  at  any  time  when  both  luminaries  are  above  the  horizon.  Hence, 
two  angles  of  the  triangle  being  known,  the  triangle  can  be  constructed 
in  species,  and  the  ratio  of  the  distances  of  the  sun  and  moon  from  the 
eye  can  be  found.2 

Vitruvius  makes  Aristarchus  the  inventor  of  the  scaphe  ((TKO^TJ),  a  dial, 
in  wrhich  the  style  throws  its  shadow  on  a  hemisphere  whose  centre  is 
the  top  of  the  style  ;  and  also  of  another  which  he  calls  "  discus  in  plani- 
tia."  Censorinus  attributes  to  Aristarchus  the  invention  of  the  "  annus 
magnus,"  a  period  of  two  thousand  four  hundred  and  eighty-four  years. 

In  the  application  of  his  excellent  idea  on  the  distances  of  the  sun  and 
moon,  Aristarchus  was  not  very  fortunate,  as  his  means  of  measurement 
did  not  enable  him  to  get  the  elongation  correctly.  Accordingly,  he 
makes  the  sun's  distance  only  about  twenty  times  that  of  the  moon,  in 
stead  of  about  four  hundred  times,  as  it  should  be.  His  result,  even  on 
his  own  data,  is  not  so  accurate  as  it  might  have  been  made  from  a  ruler 
and  compasses ;  and  he  appears  to  have  had  no  idea  whatever  of  any  trig 
onometrical  table  or  process.  His  notions  on  the  apparent  diameters  of 
the  luminaries  are  very  inaccurate,  as  given  in  his  own  work,  though 
Archimedes  attributes  to  him  much  more  exact  values  than  his  own. 

It  has  been  the  common  opinion,  at  least  in  modern  times,  that  Aris 
tarchus  agreed  with  Philolaus  and  other  philosophers  of  the  Pythagorean 
school  in  considering  the  sun  to  be  fixed,  and  attributing  a  motion  to  the 
earth.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  Aristarchus  adopted  this  opinion 
rather  as  an  hypothesis  for  particular  purposes  than'as  a  statement  of  the 
actual  system  of  the  universe.  In  fact,  Plutarch,  in  another  place,  ex 
pressly  says  that  Aristarchus  taught  it  only  hypothetically.  It  appears 
from  a  passage  in  the  Arenarius  that  Aristarchus  had  much  juster  views 
than  his  predecessors  concerning  the  extent  of  the  universe.  He  main 
tained,  namely,  that  the  sphere,  of  the  fixed  stars  was  so  large  that  it  bore 
to  the  orbit  of  the  earth  the  relation  of  a  sphere  to  its  centre.  What  he 
meant  by  the  expression  is  not  clear  :  it  may  be  interpreted  as  an  antici- 

1  Donkin;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Diet.  Biog.,Soc.  D.  U.  K.,vol.  Hi.,  p.  409. 


430 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


pation  of  modern  discoveries,  but  in  this  sense  it  could  express  only  a 
conjecture,  which  the  observations  of  the  age  were  not  accurate  enough 
either  to  confirm  or  refute,  a  remark  which  is  equally  applicable  to  the 
theory  of  the  earth's  motion.  Whatever  may  be  the  truth  on  these  points, 
it  is  probable  that  even  the  opinion,  that  the  sun  was  nearly  twenty  times 
as  distant  as  the  moon,  indicates  a  great  step  in  advance  of  the  popular 
doctrines.1 

The  editions  of  Aristarchus  are,  1.  In  Latin,  by  Geo.  Valla,  Venice,  1498,  fol.,  in  a  vol 
ume  containing  the  "  Logica"  of  Nicephorus,  and  other  matters.  2.  In  Latin,  by  Com- 
mandine,  with  the  commentary  of  Pappus,  Pesaro,  1572.  3.  In  Greek  and  Latin,  with 
the  commentary  of  Pappus,  by  Wallis,  Oxford,  1688,  reprinted  in  the  third  volume  of  his 
works,  Oxford,  1699.  There  is  a  French  translation  of  Aristarchus  "  On  the  Magnitude 
and  Distances  of  the  Sun  and  Moon,"  by  Portia  d'Urban,  Paris,  1823,  8vo.  This  transla 
tion  had  previously  appeared  at  Paris  in  1810,  with  the  Greek  text,  which  is  described 
as,  together  with  the  scholia,  having  been  amended  by  the  aid  of  some  MSS.  This  work 
is  entitled  "  Histoire  a"  Aristarque  de  Samos,  suivie  de  la  traduction  de  son  outrage  sur  les 
distances  du  Soleil  de  la  Lune,"  &c.2 

III.  ERATOSTHENES.3  We  have  already  spoken  of  this  individual  as  a 
geographer,  philosopher,  historian,  and  grammarian  ;  we  will  now  con 
sider  him  as  a  geometer  and  astronomer.  It  is  supposed  that  Eratosthe 
nes  suggested  to  Ptolemy  Euergetes  the  construction  of  the  large  armil- 
Ice.  or  fixed  circular  instruments,  which  were  long  in  use  in  Alexandrea, 
but  only  because  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  to  whom  else  they  are  to  be 
assigned ;  for  Ptolemy  (the  astronomer),  though  he  mentions  them,  and 
incidentally  their  antiquity,  does  not  state  to  whom  they  were  due.  In 
these  circles  each  degree  was  divided  into  six  parts.  We  know  of  no 
observations  of  Eratosthenes  in  which  they  were  probably  employed,  ex 
cept  those  which  led  him  to  the  obliquity  of  the  ecliptic,  which  he  must 
have  made  to  be  23°  51'  20" ;  for  he  states  the  distance  of  the  tropics  to 
be  eleven  times  the  eighty-third  part  of  the  circumference.  This  was  a 
good  observation  for  the  time :  Ptolemy  (the  astronomer)  was  content 
with  it,  and,  according  to  him,  Hipparchus  used  no  other.  According  to 
Nicomachus,  he  was  the  inventor  of  the  K.t>aKi.vov,  or  Cribrum  Arithmeti- 
cum,  as  it  has  since  been  called,  being  the  well-known  method  of  detecting 
the  prime  numbers,  by  writing  down  all  odd  numbers  which  do  not  end 
with  5,  and  striking  out  successively  the  multiples  of  each,  one  after  the 
other,  so  that  only  prime  numbers  remain. 

We  still  possess,  under  the  name  of  Eratosthenes,  a  work  entitled  Kar- 
affTepio-fjioi,  giving  a  slight  account  of  the  constellations,  their  fabulous 
history,  and  the  stars  composing  them.  It  is,  however,  acknowledged 
on  all  hands  that  this  is  not  a  work  of  Eratosthenes.  It  has  been  shown 
by  Bernhardy*  to  be  a  miserable  compilation  made  by  some  Greek  gram 
marian  from  the  Poeticon  Astronomicon  of  Hyginus.  There  is,  besides 
this,  a  letter  of  Eratosthenes  to  Ptolemy  on  the  duplication  of  the  cube, 
for  the  mechanical  performance  of  which  he  had  contrived  an  instrument, 
of  which  he  seems  to  contemplate  actual  use  in  measuring  the  contents 
of  vessels.  He  seems  to  say  that  he  has  had  his  method  engraved  in 

i  Donkin,  1.  c.  2  Eiog.  Dict.,Soc.  D.  U.  K.,  I.  c. 

3  De  Morgan;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Eratosthenica,  p.  110,  seqq. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  431 

some  temple  or  public  building,  with  some  verses  which  he  adds.  Euto- 
cius  has  preserved  this  letter  in  his  comment  on  book  ii.,  prop.  2,  of  the 
Sphere  and  Cylinder  of  Archimedes. 

The  greatest  work,  however,  of  Eratosthenes,  and  that  which  must 
always  make  his  name  conspicuous  in  scientific  history,  is  the  attempt 
which  he  made  to  measure  the  magnitude  of  the  earth,  in  which  he 
brought  forward  and  used  the  method  which  is  employed  to  this  day. 
Whether  or  no  he  was  successful  can  not  be  told,  as  we  shall  see ;  but 
it  is  not  the  less  true  that  he  was  the  originator  of  the  process  by  which 
we  now  know,  very  nearly  indeed,  the  magnitude  of  our  own  planet.  At 
Syene,-in  Upper  Egypt,  which  is  supposed  to  be  the  same  as,  or  near  to 
the  town  of  Assouan  (lat.  2*4°  10'  N.,  long.  32°  59'  E.  of  Greenwich),  Era 
tosthenes  was  told  (that  he  observed  is  very  doubtful)  that  deep  wells 
were  enlightened  to  the  bottom  on  the  day  of  the  summer  solstice,  and 
that  vertical  objects  cast  no  shadows.  He  concluded,  therefore,  that 
Syene  was  on  the  tropic,  and  its  latitude  equal  to  the  obliquity  of  the 
ecliptic,  which,  as  we  have  seen,  he  had  determined :  he  presumed  that 
it  was  in  the  same  longitude  as  Alexandrea,  in  which  he  was  out  about 
three  degrees,  which,  however,  is  not  enough  to  produce  what  would  at 
that  time  have  been  a  sensible  error.  By  observations  made  at  Alexan 
drea,  he  determined  the  zenith  of  that  place  to  be  distant  by  the  fiftieth 
part  of  the  circumference  from  the  solstice,  which  was  equivalent  to  say 
ing  that  the  arc  of  the  meridian  between  the  two  places  is  7°  12'.  The 
result  of  his  computations  is  250,000  stadia  for  the  circumference  of  the 
earth,  which  he  altered  into  252,000,  that  his  result  might  give  an  exact 
number  of  stadia  for  the  degree,  namely,  700 ;  this,  of  course,  should 
have  been  694£.  Pliny  calls  this  31,500  Roman  miles,  and  therefore 
supposes  the  stadium  to  be  the  eighth  part  of  a  Roman  mile,  or  takes  for 
granted  that  Eratosthenes  used  the  Olympic  stadium.  It  is  likely  enough 
that  the  Ptolemies  naturalized  this  stadium  in  Egypt ;  but,  nevertheless, 
it  is  not  unlikely  that  an  Egyptian  stadium  was  employed.  If  we  assume 
the  Olympic  stadium  (2024  yards),  the  degree  of  Eratosthenes  is  more 
than  seventy-nine  miles,  upward  often  miles  too  great.1 

According  to  Plutarch,  Eratosthenes  made  the  sun  to  be  804  millions 
of  stadia  from  the  earth,  and  the  moon  780,000  ;  according  to  Macrobius, 
he  made  the  diameter  of  the  sun  to  be  twenty-seven  times  that  of  the 
earth. 

We  have  already  spoken  of  Bernhardy's  edition  of  the  fragments  of  Eratosthenes. 
The  Karao-TeptoyAoi  have  been  often  printed  separately  ;  in  Dr.  Fell's,  or  the  Oxford, 
edition  of  Aratus,  1762,  8vo ;  by  Gale,  in  the  Opuscula  Physica  et  Ethica,  Amsterdam, 
1688,  8vo  ;  by  Schaubach,  with  notes  by  Heyne,  Gottingen,  1795,  8vo  ;  by  Matthias,  in  his 
Aratus,  Frankfort,  1817,  8vo;  and  more  recently  by  Westermann,  in  his  Scriptores  His 
tories  poeticos  Graeci,  p.  239,  seqq. 

IV.  HIPPARCHUS  ("iTTTra/Jxos),3  a  celebrated  Greek  astronomer,  was  a 
native  of  Nicaea,  in  Bithynia,  and  flourished  B.C.  160-145.  He  resided 
both  at  Rhodes  and  Alexandrea.  He  raised  astronomy  to  that  rank 
among  the  applications  of  arithmetic  and  geometry  which  it  has  always 

1  Ponkin,  1.  c.  2  ve  Morgan;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


432  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

since  preserved.  He  was  the  first  who  gave  and  demonstrated  the  means 
of  solving  all  triangles,  rectilinear  and  spherical.  He  constructed  a  table 
of  chords,  of  which  he  made  the  same  sort  of  use  as  we  make  of  our 
sines.  He  made  more  observations  than  his  predecessors,  and  under 
stood  them  better.  He  invented  the  planisphere,  or  the  mode  of  repre 
senting  the  starry  heavens  upon  a  plane,  and  of  producing  the  solutions 
of  problems  of  spherical  astronomy.  He  is  also  the  father  of  true  geog 
raphy,  by  his  happy  idea  of  marking  the  position  of  spots  on  the  earth,  as 
was  done  with  the  stars,  by  circles  drawn  from  the  pole  perpendicularly 
to  the  equator;  that  is,  by  latitudes  and  longitudes.  His  method  of 
eclipses  was  the  only  one  by  which  difference/,  of  meridians  could  be  de 
termined.  The  catalogue  which  Hipparchus  constructed  of  the  stars  is 
preserved  in  the  Almagest  of  Ptolemy.  Hipparchus  wrote  numerous 
works,  which  are  all  lost,  with  the  exception  of  his  commentary  on  the 
Phenomena  of  Aratus.  This  work  has  always  been  received  as  the  un 
doubted  work  of  Hipparchus,  though,  beyond  all  question,  it  must  have 
been  written  before  any  of  his  great  discoveries  had  been  made.  The 
comparison  of  Eudoxus  and  Aratus,  which  runs  throughout  this  work, 
constitutes  the  best  knowledge  we  have  of  the  former.  This  work  has 
been  twice  published,  once  by  P.Victor,  Florence,  1567,  fol.,  and  again 
by  Petavius,  in  his  Uranologion,  Paris,  1630,  fol.1 

III.     MECHANICIANS. 

I.  CTESIDIUS  (KTTjo-ijStos),2  celebrated  for  his  mechanical  inventions,  was 
born  at  Alexandrea,  and  lived  probably  about  B.C.  250,  in  the  reigns  of 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus  and  Euergetes,  though  Athenseus3  says  that  he 
flourished  in  the  time  of  the  second  Euergetes.     His  father  was  a  bar 
ber,  but  his  own  taste  led  him  to  devote  himself  to  mechanics.     He  is 
said  to  have  invented  a  clepsydra,  or  water-clock,  a  hydraulic  organ 
(v8pav\is),  and  other  machines,  and  to  have  been  the  first  to  discover  the 
elastic  force  of  air  and  apply  it  as  a  moving  power.     Vitruvius  mentions 
him  as  an  author,  but  none  of  his  works  remain. 

II.  HERON  (c/H/>&>j/),4  of  Alexandrea,  was  a  pupil  of  Ctesibins,  and  lived 
in  the  reigns  of  the  Ptolemies,  Philadelphus  and  Euergetes,  B.C.  285-222. 
Of  his  life  nothing  is  known  ;  on  his  mechanical  inventions  we  have  but 
some  scattered  parts  of  his  own  writings,  and  some  scattered  notices. 
The  common  pneumatic  experiment  called  Hero's  Fountain,  in  which  a 
jet  of  water  is  maintained  by  condensed  air,  has  given  a  certain  popular 
celebrity  to  his  name.     This  has  been  increased  by  the  discovery  in  his 
writings  of  a  steam-engine,  that  is,  of  an  engine  in  which  motion  is  pro 
duced  by  steam,  and  which  must  always  be  a  part  of  the  history  of  that 
agent.     This  engine  acts  precisely  on  the  principle  of  what  is  called 
Barker's  Mill :  a  boiler  with  arms  having  lateral  orifices  is  capable  of  re 
volving  around  a  vertical  axis  ;  the  steam  issues  from  the  lateral  orifices, 
and  the  uncornpensated  pressure  upon  the  parts  opposite  to  the  orifices 
turns  the  boiler  in  the  direction  opposite  to  that  of  the  issue  of  the  steam. 

1  De  Morgan,  1.  c.  2  Donkin  ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Athcn.,  iv.,  p.  174.  «  De  Morgan;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  a.  v. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  433 

Heron's  engine  is  described  in  his  Pneumatics,  presently  mentioned  ;  as 
also  a  double  forcing-pump  used  for  a  fire-engine,  and  various  other  ap 
plications  of  the  elasticity  of  air  and  steam.  It  is,  however,  but  recently 
that  the  remarkable  claims  of  Heron  to  success  in  such  investigations 
have  received  any  marked  notice.  In  the  "  Origine  des  Decouvertes  attri 
butes  aux  Moderncs"  (third  edition,  1796),  by  M.  Dutens,  who  tries  with 
great  learning  to  make  the  best  possible  case  for  the  ancients,  the  name 
of  Heron  is  not  even  mentioned. 

The  remaining  works,  or,  rather,  fragments  of  Heron,  of  Alexandrea,  are  as  follows : 
1.  XeipojSaAAicrrpas  /caracr/ceuT)  *ai  <rv/u./u.eTpia,  De  constructione  et  mensura  Manubalistce. 
First  published  in  Greek,  by  Baldi,  at  the  end  of  the  third  work,  presently  noted.  Also 
(Greek  and  Latin)  by  Thevenot,  Boivin,  and  Lahire,  in  the  "  Veterum  Mathematicorum, 
Athentei,  Apollodori,  Philonis,  Heronis,  et  aliorum  opera,"  Paris,  1693,  fol.  2.  "Barulcus,  sine 
de  Oneribus  trahendis  Libri  tres,"  a  treatise  brought  by  J.  Goltus  from  the  East  in  Arabic, 
not  yet  translated  or  published.1  3.  BeXon-oiiVca,  or  BeXoTj-oujriKa,  on  the  manufacture 
of  darts.  Edited  by  Bernardino  Baldi  (Greek  and  Latin),  with  notes  and  a  life  of  Heron, 
Augsburg,  1616,  4to,  also  in  the  Veter.  Mathemat.,  <fec.,  above  mentioned.  4.  ncev/xan- 
K.O.,  or  Spiritalia,  the  most  celebrated  of  his  works.  Edited  by  Commandine  (Latin), 
with  notes,  Urbino,  1575,  4to,  Amsterdam,  1680,  4to,  and  Paris,  1683,  4to.  It  is  also 
(Greek  and  Latin)  in  the  Veter.  Mathemat.,  &c.,  already  mentioned.  It  first  appeared, 
however,  in  an  Italian  translation  by  Bernardo  Aleotti,  Bologna,  1547,  4to,  Ferrara,  1589, 
4to  ;  and  there  is  also  an  Italian  translation  by  Alessandro  Giorgi,  of  Urbino,  1592,  4to ; 
and  by  J.  B.  Porta,  Naples,  1605,  4to.  There  is  a  German  translation  by  Agathus  Cario, 
with  an  appendix  by  Solomon  de  Caus,  Bamberg,  1687,  4to,  Frankfort,  1688,  4to.  5.  ITepl 
avTOfj.aronoL-rjTi:Kti)v,  De  Automatorum  fabrica,  libri  duo.  Translated  into  Italian  by  B. 
Baldi,  Venice,  1589,  1601,  1661,  4to,  also  (Greek  and  Latin)  in  the  Veter.  Mathemat.,  &c. 
6.  A  fragment  on  Dioptrics  (Greek)  exists  in  MS.,  and  two  Latin  fragments  on  military 
machines  are  given  by  Baldi  at  the  end  of  the  work  on  darts.  The  following  lost  works 
are  mentioned:  To.  Trepl  vSpoa/coTreiojf,  by  Proclus,  Pappus,  and  Heron  himself;  ITepl 
/ueTpiKtov,  by  Eutocius ;  Ilepc  Tpox"o5iajp,  by  Pappus ;  and  a  work,  Hep!  ZvyiW,  men 
tioned  by  Pappus,  and  supposed  to  be  by  Heron. 

III.  ATHEN^US  ('AflTji/cuos),  a  contemporary  of  Archimedes,  and  the  au 
thor  of  an  extant  work,  Uepl  M7jxa*'W*T&»/>  "  On  warlike  Engines,"  ad 
dressed  to  Marcellus  (probably  the  conqueror  of  Syracuse).     He  is  per 
haps  the  same  with  Athenaeus  of  Cyzicus,  mentioned  by  Proclus2  as  a 
distinguished  mathematician.     The  work  is  printed  in  Thevenot's  Mathe- 
matici  Veteres,  Paris,  1693. 

IV.  BITON  (Biron/),3  the  author  of  a  work  called  Karao-Keual  TroAe^i/ccSj/ 
opydvcw  Kal  Karaire\TiKwv,  on  military  machines.     His  history  and  place  of 
birth  are  unknown.     He  is  mentioned  by  Hcsychius,  by  Heron  the  youn 
ger*  (who  is  supposed  to  have  lived  under  Heraclius,  A.D.  610-641),  and 
perhaps  by  JElian,5  under  the  name  of  BtW.     The  treatise  consists  of  de 
scriptions  :  1.  Of  a  Trerp6fio\ov,  or  machine  for  throwing  stones,  made  at 
Rhodes  by  Charon  the  Magnesian.     2.  Of  another  at  Thessalonica,  by 
Isidorus  the  Abydenian.     3.  Of  a  EveTroAis,  an  apparatus  used  for  besieg 
ing  cities,  made  by  Posidonius  of  Macedon  for  Alexander  the  Great.     4. 
Of  a  Sambuca,  made  by  Damius  of  Colophon.     5.  Of  a  yaa-Tpatyfrris  (an 
engine  somewhat  resembling  a  cross-bow,  and  so  named  from  the  way 
in  which  it  was  held  in  order  to  stretch  the  string),  made  by  Zopyrus  of 
Tarentum  at  Miletus,  and  another,  by  the  same,  at  Cumae,  in  Italy.    The 

1  Ephem.  Lift.  Getting,  ann.  1785,  p.  625,  seqq.  2  In  Euclid.,  p.  19. 

3  Donkin;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.          *  De  Mach.  Bell.,  procem.  *•  Tact.,  c.  i. 

T 


434  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Greek  text,  with  a  Latin  version,  is  printed  in  the  collection  of  ancient 
mathematicians  by  Thevenot,  already  mentioned,  Paris,  1693,  fol.,  p.  105, 
seqq.  Biton  mentions  a  work  of  his  own  on  Optics,  which  is  lost. 

V.  PHILO  (*/A.<w),  of  Byzantium,1  a  celebrated  mechanician,  and  a  con 
temporary  of  Ctesibius,  flourished  about  B.C.  146.  He  wrote  a  work  on 
military  engineering,  of  which  the  fourth  and  fifth  books  have  come  down 
to  us,  and  are  printed  in  Thevenot's  Collection  of  the  Ancient  Mathema 
ticians,  Paris,  1693,  fol.  The  fourth  book  is  headed  'E/c  TU>V  QiXcavos  Be- 
AoTrouftwj',  and  the  general  subject  is  the  manufacture  of  missiles.  In  the 
fifth  book  we  are  shocked  to  find,  that  while  recommending  a  besieging 
army  to  devastate  the  open  country  on  the  approach  of  an  enemy,  he  ad 
vises  them  to  poison  the  springs  and  the  grain  which  they  can  not  dispose 
of  (p.  103) ;  and,  what  renders  this  the  worse,  he  mentions  his  having 
treated  of  poisons  in  his  book  on  the  preparations  that  should  be  made 
for  war.  What  principally  attracted  attention  to  this  work  in  modern 
times  is  his  notice  of  the  invention  of  Ctesibius  (p.  77,  seqq.).  The  in 
strument  described  by  him,  named  afptrovos,  acted  on  the  property  of  air 
when  condensed,  and  is  evidently,  in  principle,  the  same  with  the  modern 
air-gun.  According  to  Montucla,  Philo  was  well  skilled  in  geometry,  and 
his  solution  of  the  problem  of  the  two  mean  proportionals,  although  the 
same  in  principle  with  that  of  Apollonius,  has  its  peculiar  merits  in  prac 
tice.  We  learn  from  Pappus  that  he  wrote  a  treatise  on  mechanics,  the 
object  of  which  was  nearly  the  same  as  Heron's. 

To  Philo  of  Byzantium  is  attributed  another  work,  Tlfpl  T&V  CTTTO  &ea- 
fidrcav,  "  On  the  Seven  Wonders  of  the  World."  But  Fabricius  thinks  it 
impossible  that  an  eminent  mathematician  like  Philo  of  Byzantium  could 
have  written  this  work,  and  conjectures  that  it  was  written  by  Philo  of 
Heraclea.  It  is  more  probable,  however,  that  it  is  the  production  of  a 
later  rhetorical  writer,  who  gave  it  the  name  of  Philo  of  Byzantium,  as 
that  of  a  man  who,  from  his  life  and  writings,  might  be  supposed  to  have 
chosen  it  as  a  subject  for  composition.  The  wonders  treated  of  are  the 
Hanging  Gardens,  the  Pyramids,  the  Statue  of  Jupiter  Olympius,  the  Walls 
of  Babylon,  the  Colossus  of  Rhodes,  the  Temple  of  Diana  at  Ephesus,  and, 
we  may  presume  from  the  procemium,  the  Mausoleum ;  but  the  last  is  en 
tirely  wanting,  and  we  have  only  a  fragment  of  the  description  of  the 
Ephesian  temple.  The  style,  though  not  wholly  devoid  of  elegance,  is 
florid  and  rhetorical.2 

This  last-mentioned  work  exists  only  in  one  MS.,  which,  originally  in  the  Vatican, 
was  in  1816  in  Paris,  No.  389.  It  was  first  edited  by  Allatius,  Rome,  1640,  with  a  loose 
Latin  translation,  and  desultory,  though  learned  notes.  It  was  re-edited  from  the  same 
MS.  by  Dionysius  Salvagnius  Boessius,  ambassador  from  the  French  court  to  the  pope, 
and  included  in  his  Miscella,  printed  at  Leyden,  1661.  This  edition  has  a  more  correct 
translation  than  that  of  Allatius,  but  abounds  in  typographical  errors,  there  being  no 
fewer  than  150  in  fourteen  pages.  Gronovius  reprinted  the  edition  of  Allatius  in  his 
Thesaurus  Antiquitalum  Grcecarum  (vol.  vii.,  p.  2645,  seqq.).  It  was  finally  reprinted  at 
Leipzig,  1816,  edited  by  J.  C.  Orelli.  This  edition,  which  is  undoubtedly  the  best,  con 
tains  the  Greek,  with  the  translations  of  both  Allatius  and  Boessius  (with  the  exception 
of  a  fragment  of  a  mutilated  chapter,  reprinted  from  the  translation  of  L.Holstein,  which 
originally  appeared  in  Gronovius,  vol.  vii.,  p.  389),  the  notes  of  Allatius  and  others, 

1  Smifh,  Dirt.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  ///.  ih. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD  435 

along  with  some  passages  from  other  writers,  who  had  treated  of  the  same  or  similar 
subjects,  the  fragments  of  the  sophist  Callinicus  and  Adrian  the  Tyrian,  and  an  Index 
Graecitatis. 


CHAPTER  XLV. 

FIFTH  OR  ALEXANDRINE  PERIOD— continued. 
MEDICAL     SCIENCE. 

I.  THE  two  most  important  medical  sects  during  the  period  under  re 
view  were  the  Dogmatici  and  Empirici.     The  former  of  these  had  been 
founded  as  early  as  B.C.  400,  by  Thessalus,  the  son,  and  Polybus,  the 
son-in-law  of  Hippocrates,  and  were  so  called  because  they  went  by  gen 
eral  principles.     The  school  of  the  Dogmatici  retained  its  influence  until 
the  rise  of  the  Empirici,  a  sect  founded  by  Philinus  of  Cos  and  Serapion 
of  Alexandrea,  in  the  third  century  B.C.,  and  so  called  because  they  pro 
fessed  to  derive  their  knowledge  from  experience  (epirfipia)  only ;  after 
which  time  every  member  of  the  medical  profession,  during  a  long  period, 
ranged  himself  in  one  of  these  two  sects. 

II.  In  the  first  century  B.C.,  Themison  founded  the  sect  of  the  Method- 
id,  who  held  doctrines  nearly  intermediate  between  those  of  the  two 
sects  already  mentioned.     About  two  centuries  later,  the  Methodici  were 
divided  into  numerous  sects,  as  the  doctrines  of  particular  physicians  be 
came  more  generally  received.     The  chief  of  these  sects  were  the  Pneu- 
matici  and  the  Eclectici ;  the  former  founded  by  Athenaeus  about  the  mid 
dle  or  end  of  the  first  century  A.D. ;  the  latter  about  the  same  time, 
either  by  Agathinus  of  Sparta,  or  his  pupil  Archigenes. 

III.  We  will  now  proceed  to  notice  some  of  the  most  prominent  mem 
bers  of  the  two  sects  of  the  Dogmatici  and  Empirici. 

DOGMATICI. 

I.  DIOCLES  of  Carystus  (&ioK\ris  6  Kapixrnos),1  a  very  celebrated  Greek 
physician,  was  born  at  Carystus,  in  Eubcea,  and  lived  in  the  fourth  cen 
tury  B.C.,  not  long  after  the  time  of  Hippocrates,  to  whom  Pliny  says  he 
was  next  in  age  and  fame.2  He  wrote  several  medical  works,  of  which 
only  the  titles  and  some  fragments  remain,  preserved  by  Galen,  Caelius 
Aurelianus,  Oribasius,  and  other  ancient  writers.  The  longest  of  these 
is  a  letter  to  King  Antigonus,  entitled  'ETTKTTOA^  npo(pv\aKTLK-f),  "A  Letter 
on  preserving  Health,"  which  is  inserted  by  Paulus  ^Egineta  at  the  end 
of  the  first  book  of  his  medical  work,  and  which,  if  genuine,  was  probably 
addressed  to  Antigonus  Gonatas,  king  of  Macedonia,  who  died  B.C.  239, 
at  the  age  of  eighty,  after  a  reign  of  forty-four  years.  It  resembles  in  its 
subject-matter  several  other  similar  letters,  ascribed  to  Hippocrates,  and 
treats  of  the  diet  fitted  for  the  different  seasons  of  the  year.  It  is  pub 
lished  in  the  various  editions  of  Paulus  ^Egineta,  and  also  in  several  oth 
er  works,  as,  for  example,  in  Greek,  in  Matthaei's  edition  of  Rufus  Ephe- 
sius,  Moscow,  1806,  8vo ;  in  Greek  and  Latin,  in  the  twelfth  volume  of 
1  Greenhill;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Plin.,  H.  N.,  xxvi.,  6. 


436  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

the  old  edition  of  Fabricius's  Bibliotheca  Graca ;  and  in  Mich.  Neander's 
Sylloga.  Physicce,  Leipzig,  1591,  8vo ;  and  in  Latin  with  Alexander  Tral- 
lianus,  Basle,  1541,  fol. ;  and  Meletius,  Venice,  1522,  4to,  &c.  Some  per 
sons  have  attributed  to  Diocles  the  honor  of  first  explaining  the  difference 
between  the  veins  and  arteries ;  but  this  does  not  seem  to  be  correct, 
nor  is  any  great  discovery  connected  with  his  name.  Further  informa 
tion  respecting  him  may  be  found  in  Fabricius,  Biblioth.  Gr&c.,  vol.  xii.,  p. 
584,  of  the  old  edition ;  and  in  Kiihn,  Opuscula  Academica,  Med.  et  Philo- 
log.,  Leipzig,  1827,  vol.  ii.,  p.  87. 

II.  PRAXAGORAS  (n.pa£ay6pas),1  of  Cos,  a  celebrated  physician,  who  lived 
in  the  fourth  century  B.C.     He  belonged  to  the  order  of  the  Asclepiadae,8 
and  was  celebrated  for  his  knowledge  of  medical  science  in  general,  and 
especially  for  his  attainments  in  anatomy  and  physiology.     He  was  one 
of  the  chief  defenders  of  the  humoral  pathology,  placing  the  seat  of  all 
diseases  in  the  humors  of  the  body.3    Many  of  his  anatomical  opinions 
have  been  preserved,  which  show  that  he  was  in  advance  of  his  contem 
poraries  in  this  branch  of  medical  knowledge.     On  the  other  hand,  sev 
eral  curious  and  capital  errors  have  been  attributed  to  him,  as,  for  in 
stance,  that  the  heart  was  the  source  of  the  nerves  (an  opinion  which  he 
held  with  Aristotle),  and  that  the  ramifications  of  the  artery  which  he 
saw  issue  from  the  heart  were  ultimately  converted  into  nerves  as  they 
contracted  in  diameter.     Some  parts  of  his  medical  practice  appear  to 
have  been  very  bold,  as,  for  instance,  his  venturing,  in  cases  of  ileus, 
when  attended  with  introsusception,  to  open  the  abdomen  in  order  to  re 
place  the  intestine.4    He  wrote  several  medical  works,  of  which  only  the 
titles  and  some  fragments  remain,  preserved  by  Galen,  Caelius  Aurelius, 
and  other  writers. 

III.  HEROPHILUS  ('H/xtyuA-os),5  one  of  the  most  celebrated  physicians  of 
antiquity,  who  is  best  known  on  account  of  his  skill  in  anatomy  and  phys 
iology,  but  of  whose  personal  history  few  details  have  been  preserved. 
He  was  a  native  of  Chalcedon,6  and  lived  at  Alexandrea  under  the  first 
Ptolemy,  who  reigned  B.C.  323-285.    Here  he  soon  acquired  a  great  repu 
tation,  and  was  one  of  the  early  founders  of  the  medical  school  in  that  city, 
which  afterward  eclipsed  in  celebrity  all  the  others,  so  much  so,  that,  in 
the  fourth  century  after  Christ,  the  very  fact  of  a  physician  having  studied 
at  Alexandrea  was  considered  to  be  a  sufficient  guarantee  of  his  ability.7 
He  seems  to  have  given  his  chief  attention  to  anatomy,  which  he  studied 
not  merely  from  the  dissection  of  animals,  but  also  from  that  of  human 
bodies,  as  is  expressly  asserted  by  Galen.     He  is  even  said  to  have  car 
ried  his  ardor  in  his  anatomical  pursuits  so  far  as  to  have  dissected  crim 
inals  alive — a  well-known  accusation,  which  it  seems  difficult  entirely  to 
disbelieve,  though  most  of  his  biographers  have  tried  to  explain  it  away, 
or  to  throw  discredit  on  it.     He  was  the  author  of  several  medical  and 
anatomical  works,  of  which  nothing  but  the  titles  and  a  few  fragments 

1  Greenhiil;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  a  Galen,  De  Meth.  Med.,  i.,  3. 

3  Id.,  Jntrod.,  c.  9,  p.  699.  *  Ccel.  Aurel,  De  Morb.  Acut.,  iii.,  17,  p.  244. 

s  Greenhiil;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  6  Galen.,  Introd.,vo\.  xiv.,  p.  683,  ed.  Kuhn. 
7  Amm.  Marcell.,  xxii.,  16. 


ALEXANDRINE     PERIOD.  437 

remain.  These  have  been  collected  by  Marx,  and  published  in  a  disser 
tation  entitled  "  De  Herophili  Celeberrimi  Medici  Vita,  Scriptis,  atque  in 
Medidna  Mentis,"  Gottingen,  1840,  4to.  Several  of  the  names  which  he 
gave  to  different  parts  of  the  human  frame  still  remain  in  common  use, 
under  a  Latin  form,  to  this  day  ;  as  the  "  Torcular  Herophili,11  the  "  Cala 
mus  Scriptorius,"  and  the  "  Duodenum."  He  is  the  first  person  who  is 
known  to  have  commented  on  any  of  the  works  of  Hippocrates.1  He 
was  also  the  founder  of  a  medical  school  which  produced  several  eminent 
physicians.  Of  the  physicians  who  belonged  to  this  school,  perhaps  the 
following  were  the  most  celebrated :  Andreas,  Apollonius  Mus,  Aristox- 
enus,  Baccheius,  Callianax,  Callimachus,  Demetrius,  Dioscorides  Phacas, 
and  others. 

IV.  ERASISTRATUS  ('EpcuriffTparos),*  one  of  the  most  celebrated  physi 
cians  and  anatomists  of  antiquity,  is  generally  supposed  to  have  been 
born  at  lulis,  in  the  island  of  Ceos.3  He  was  a  pupil  of  Chrysippus  of 
Cnidos,  of  Metrodorus,  and  apparently  of  Theophrastus.  Erasistratus 
flourished  from  B.C.  300  to  B.C.  260.  He  lived  for  some  time  at  the 
court  of  Seleucus  Nicator,  king  of  Syria,  where  he  acquired  great  reputa 
tion  by  discovering  the  cause  of  the  malady  of  Antiochus,  the  king's  eld 
est  son,  namely,  his  love  for  his  mother-in-law,  the  young  and  beautiful 
daughter  of  Demetrius  Poliorcetes,  whom  Seleucus  had  lately  married.* 
Erasistratus  is  said  to  have  received  100  talents  for  being  the  means  of 
restoring  the  young  prince  to  health,  which  (supposing  the  Attic  standard 
to  be  meant,  and  the  talent  to  be  equal  to  £243  15s.)  would  amount  to 
£24,375,  one  of  the  largest  medical  fees  on  record.  Erasistratus  after 
ward  lived  at  Alexandrea,  then  beginning  to  be  a  celebrated  medical 
school,  and  gave  up  practice  in  his  old  age  that  he  might  pursue  his  ana 
tomical  studies  without  interruption.5  He  prosecuted  his  experiments 
and  researches  in  this  branch  of  medical  science  with  great  success,  and 
with  such  ardor  that  he  is  said  to  have  dissected  criminals  alive.6  He 
appears  to  have  died  in  Asia  Minor,  as  Suidas  mentions  that  he  was 
buried  near  Mount  Mycale,  in  Ionia.  The  exact  date  of  his  death  is  not 
known,  but  he  probably  lived  to  a  good  old  age,  as,  according  to  Euse- 
bius,  he  was  alive  B.C.  258.  He  had  numerous  pupils  and  followers,  and 
a  medical  school  bearing  his  name  continued  to  exist  at  Smyrna,  in  Ionia, 
nearly  till  the  time  of  Strabo,  about  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era. 
He  wrote  several  works  on  anatomy,  practical  medicine,  and  pharmacy, 
of  which  only  the  titles  remain,  together  with  a  great  number  of  short 
fragments,  preserved  by  Galen,  Caelius  Aurelianus,  and  others.  These, 
however,  are  sufficient  to  enable  us  to  form  a  tolerably  correct  idea  of 
his  opinions  both  as  a  physician  and  anatomist.  It  is  in  this  latter  char 
acter  that  he  is  most  celebrated,  and  perhaps  there  is  no  one  of  the  an 
cient  physicians  who  did  more  to  promote  that  branch  of  medical  science. 
He  appears,  from  a  passage  preserved  by  Galen,  to  have  been  very  near 

1  Littre,  (Euvres  <P Hippocrate,  vol.  i.,  p.  83. 

2  Greenhill;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Suid.,  s.  v. ;  Strab.,  x.,  5. 

4  Appian,  De  Rebus  Syr.,  c.  59,  seqq. ;  Galen,  De  Pranot.  ad  Epig.,  c.  6. 

5  Galen,  De  Hippocr.  et  Plat.  Deer.,  vii.,  3.  6  Cels.,  De  Medic.,  i.,  praef.,  p.  6. 


438  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

the  discovery  of  the  circulation  of  the  blood.  Of  his  mode  of  cure,  the 
most  remarkable  peculiarity  was  his  aversion  to  blood-letting  and  purga 
tive  medicines :  he  seems  to  have  relied  chiefly  on  diet  and  regimen, 
bathing,  exercise,  friction,  and  the  most  simple  articles  of  the  vegetable 
kingdom.  In  surgery  he  was  celebrated  for  the  invention  of  a  catheter 
that  bore  his  name,  and  was  of  the  shape  of  a  Roman  S.1 

II.     EMPIRICI. 

I.  PHILINUS  ($t\Tj/os),  of  Cos,  was  the  reputed  founder  of  the  Empiric 
sect  of  physicians.2     He  was  a  pupil  of  Herophilus,  and  probably  lived  in 
the  third  century  B.C.     He  wrote  a  work  on  part  of  the  Hippocratic  col 
lection  directed  against  Bacchius,  and  also  one  on  botany,  neither  of 
which  is  now  extant.     A  parallel  has  been  drawn  between  Philinus  and 
the  late  Dr.  Hahnemann,  in  a  dissertation  by  Brisken,  entitled  "  Philinus 
et  Hahnemannus,  sen  veteris  sector  Empiric&  cum  hodierna  secta  HomcKOpathi- 
ca  comparatio"  Berlin,  1834,  8vo. 

II.  SERAPION  (SepaTnW),3  a  physician  of  Alexandrea,  who  lived  in  the 
third  century  B.C.     He  so  much  extended  and  improved  the  system  of 
Philinus,  that  the  invention  of  it  is  by  some  authors  attributed  to  him. 
Serapion  wrote  against  Hippocrates  with  much  vehemence,  but  neither 
this  nor  any  one  of  his  other  works  is  now  extant.     He  is  several  times 
mentioned  and  quoted  by  Celsus,  Paulus  ^Egineta,  and  Nicolaus  Myrep- 
sus,  who  have  preserved  some  of  his  medical  formulae,  which  are  not, 
however,  of  much  value.     This  Serapion  must  not  be  confounded  with 
either  of  the  two  later  Arabic  physicians  of  the  same  name. 

III.  HERACLIDES  ('Hpa/cAe/STjs),  of  Tarentum,  lived  probably  in  the  third 
or  second  century  B.C.     He  belonged  to  the  sect  of  the  Empirici,  and 
wrote  some  works  on  Materia  Medica  which  are  very  frequently  quoted 
by  Galen,  but  of  which  only  a  few  fragments  remain.     Galen  speaks  of 
him  in  high  terms  of  praise,  saying  that  he  was  an  author  who  could  be 
entirely  depended  upon,  as  he  wrote  in  his  works  only  what  he  had  him 
self  found  from  his  own  experience  to  be  correct.*    He  was  also  one  of 
the  first  persons  who  wrote  a  commentary  on  all  the  works  in  the  Hip 
pocratic  collection.     A  farther  account  of  his  lost  works,  and  of  his  med 
ical  opinions,  so  far  as  they  can  be  found  out,  may  be  found  in  two  essays 
by  Kiihn,  inserted  in  the  second  volume  of  his  Opuscula  Academica,  Med 
ica  et  Philologica,  Leipzig,  1827-8,  2  vols.  8vo.5 

1  Greenhill,  1.  c.  '2  Cramer,  Anecd.  Grcec.  Paris.,  vol.  i.,  p.  395. 

3  Greenhill ;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.        *  Galen,  De  Compos.  Medic,  sec.  Gen.,  iv.,  7. 
5  Greenhill;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ROMAN     F  E  R  I  O  D.  439 


CHAPTER  XLVI. 

SIXTH  OR  ROMAN  PERIOD. 

INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS. 

I.  The  Sixth  or  Roman  period  extends,  as  we  have  already  remarked, 
from  the  fall  of  the  Graeco-Egyptian  empire  (B.C.  30)  to  the  foundation 
of  Constantinople  (A.D.  330),  and  derives  its  name  from  the  circumstance 
of  Rome's  becoming  the  centre,  not  only  of  wealth  and  power,  but  of  sci 
ence,  literature,  and  the  arts. 

II.  Greek  literature  now  began  rapidly  to  decline.     The  total  absence 
of  political  independence,  which  marked  the  rule  of  the  Caesars,  operated 
prejudicially,  of  course,  not  only  upon  the  spirit  of  the  nation,  but  upon 
literary  efforts  of  every  kind  ;  originality,  whether  in  the  domain  of  po 
etry  or  of  prose  composition,  became  every  day  of  rarer  occurrence,  and 
learned  and  scientific  studies  alone  were  pursued  with  any  degree  of 
spirit  and  success. 

III.  One  principal  cause  of  the  successful  cultivation  of  these  last- 
mentioned  studies  was  the  establishment  at  Rome  of  public  libraries,  in 
which  Augustus  and  several  of  his   successors  imitated  the  example 
which  had  been  set  by  the  Ptolemies.     These  became  in  time  so  numer 
ous,  that,  besides  many  private  collections  of  great  extent  and  value, 
there  were  in  Rome  twenty  open  to  the  public,  and  furnished,  at  the 
emperor's  expense,  with  all  that  could  be  required  by  such  as  had  occa 
sion  to  consult  them.1 

IV.  The  emperors,  however,  did  not  content  themselves  with  accumu 
lating  these  literary  treasures ;  they  were  careful,  also,  to  form  in  the 
principal  cities  of  their  dominions  public  schools,  or,  as  we  would  term 
them,  universities,  for  the  education  of  youth.     At  Rome,  the  Capitol 
was  assigned  to  professors,  salaried  by  the  state,  for  delivering  courses 
of  instruction.     There  were  ten  for  grammar  or  philology  in  the  Greek 
and  Roman  languages  respectively ;   three  Latin  rhetoricians  and  five 
Greek  ;  one  instructor  in  philosophy,  and  two  in  jurisprudence.     Similar 
establishments  existed  at  Mediolanum  (Milan),  Massilia  (Marseilles),  and, 
above  all,  at  Carthage.     In  the  eastern  part  of  the  empire  the  principal 
schools  of  this  kind  were  at  Athens  and  Alexandrea.     The  school  at  the 
former  place  was  particularly  devoted  to  rhetorical  studies  ;  that  of  Alex 
andrea  to  mathematics,  philosophy,  and  medicine ;  for  it  must  be  remarked 
that  this  latter  city,  having  recovered  from  a  temporary  depression,  be 
came  again,  and  continued  for  several  centuries  after  the  Christian  era, 
an  important  seat  of  science  and  letters ;  boasting  such  divines  as  Cle 
ment,  Origen,  Athanasius,  and  Cyrill,  and  such  mathematicians  as  Dio- 
phantus,  Pappus,  Theon,  Proclus,  and  others.2 

V.  Antioch  and  Berytus,  also,  were  celebrated  for  their  schools,  the 
1  SchiJll,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  1,  seqq. ;  Moore,  Lectures,  <fcc.,  p.  66.          2  Scholl,  I.  c 


440  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

latter  having  become,  from  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  the  principal 
rendezvous  of  those  who  were  pursuing  the  study  of  jurisprudence.  At 
Antioch  there  was  a  public  library,  placed  in  the  temple  of  Trajan,  to 
which,  according  to  Suidas,  the  Emperor  Jovian  set  fire,  by  an  impulse 
of  fanaticism. 

VI.  Before  entering  on  our  more  immediate  subject,  it  may  not  be 
amiss  to  take  a  general  view  of  the  situation  of  the  literary  Greeks  un 
der  the  Roman  dominion.     The  habits  and  tastes  of  the  Greeks  and  Ro 
mans  were  so  different  that  they  produced  a  feeling  of  antipathy  in  the 
two  nations.     The  Roman  writers,  from  prejudice  and  jealousy,  of  which 
they  were  themselves  perhaps  unconscious,  have  transmitted  to  us  a  very 
incorrect  picture  of  the  state  of  the  Greeks  during  the  first  centuries  of 
the  empire.     They  did  not  observe  with  attention  the  marked  distinction 
between  the  Asiatic  and  Alexandrine  Greeks  and  the  natives  of  Hellas. 
The  European  population,  pursuing  the  quiet  life  of  landed  proprietors, 
or  engaged  in  the  pursuits  of  commerce  and  agriculture,  were  considered 
by  Roman  prejudice  as  unworthy  of  notice.     The  Greek  character  was 
estimated  from  the  conduct  of  the  adventurers  who  thronged  from  the 
wealthy  and  corrupted  cities  of  the  East,  in  order  to  seek  their  fortunes 
at  Rome ;  and  who,  from  motives  of  fashion  and  taste,  were  unduly  fa 
vored  by  the  Roman  aristocracy.1 

VII.  The  most  distinguished  of  these  Greeks  were  literary  men,  pro 
fessors  of  philosophy,  rhetoric,  grammar,  mathematics,  and  music.    Great 
numbers  were  engaged  as  private  teachers ;  and  this  class  were  regarded 
with  some  respect  by  the  Roman  nobility,  from  their  intimate  connection 
with  their  families.     The  great  mass  of  the  Greeks  residing  at  Rome 
were,  however,  employed  in  connection  with  the  public  and   private 
amusements  of  the  capital,  and  were  found  engaged  in  every  profession, 
from  the  directors  of  the  theatres  and  opera-houses  down  to  the  swind 
lers  who  frequented  the  haunts  of  vice.     The  testimony  of  the  Latin  au 
thors  may  be  received  as  sufficiently  accurate  concerning  the  light  in 
which  the  Greeks  were  regarded  at  Rome,  and  as  a  not  incorrect  por 
traiture  of  the  Greek  population  of  the  capital. 

VIII.  The  expressions  of  the  Romans,  when  speaking  of  the  Greeks, 
often  display  nothing  more  than  the  manner  in  which  the  proud  aristoc 
racy  of  the  empire  regarded  all  foreigners,  those  even  whom  they  admit 
ted  to  their  personal  intimacy.     The  Greeks  were  confounded  with  the 
great  body  of  strangers  from  the  Eastern  nations  in  one  general  sentence 
of  condemnation  ;  and  not  unnaturally,  for  the  Greek  language  served  as 
the  ordinary  means  of  communication  with  all  foreigners  from  the  East. 
The  magicians,  conjurers,  and  astrologers  of  Syria,  Egypt,  and  Chaldea 
were  naturally  mixed  up,  both  in  society  and  public  opinion,  with  the  ad 
venturers  of  Greece,  and  contributed  to  form  the  despicable  type  which 
was  unjustly  enough  transferred  from  the  fortune-hunters  at  Rome  to  the 
whole  Greek  nation.3 

IX.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  observe  that  Greek  literature,  as  cultiva 
ted  at  Rome  during  this  period,  had  no  connection  with  the  national  feel- 

1  Finlay,  Greece  tmdcr  the  Romans,  p.  77,  seqq,  3  7rf.,  I.  r. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  441 

ings  of  the  Greek  people.  As  far  as  the  Greeks  themselves  were  con 
cerned,  learning  was  an  honorable  and  lucrative  occupation  to  its  suc 
cessful  professors  ;  but  in  the  estimation  of  the  higher  classes  at  Rome, 
Greek  literature  was  merely  an  ornamental  exercise  of  the  mind,  a  fash 
ion  of  the  wealthy.  This  ignorance  of  Greece  and  the  Greeks  induced 
Juvenal  to  draw  his  conclusive  proof  of  the  utter  falsity  of  the  Greek 
character,  and  of  the  fabulous  nature  of  all  Greek  history,  from  his  own 
doubts  concerning  a  fact  which  is  avouched  by  the  testimony  of  Herodo 
tus  and  Thucydides  ;  but,  as  a  retort  to  the  Gracia  mendax  of  the  Roman 
satirist,  the  apter  observation  of  Lucian  may  be  cited,  that  the  Romans 
spoke  truth  only  once  in  their  lives,  and  that  was  when  they  made  their 
wills.1 

X.  The  division  of  the  Greek  nation  which  occupied  the  most  import 
ant  social  position  in  the  empire  consisted  of  the  remains  of  the  Mace 
donian  and  Greek  colonies  in  Egypt,  Syria,  and  Mesopotamia.     These 
countries  were  filled  with  Greeks  ;  and  the  cities  of  Alexandrea  and  An- 
tioch,  the  second  and  third  in  the  empire  in  size,  population,  and  wealth, 
were  chiefly  peopled  by  Greeks.     The  influence  of  Alexandrea  alone  on 
the  Roman  empire,  and  on  European  civilization,  would  require  a  long 
treatise  in  order  to  do  justice  to  the  subject.     Its  schools  of  philosophy 
produced  modifications  of  Christianity  in  the  East.     Those  feuds  between 
the  Jews  and  Christians  which  its  municipal  disputes  first  created  were 
by  its  powerful  influence  bequeathed  to  following  centuries,  so  that,  in 
Western  Europe,  we  still  debase  Christianity  by  the  admixture  of  those 
prejudices  which  had  their  rise  in  the  amphitheatre  of  Alexandrea.2 

XI.  Antioch  and  the  other  Greek  cities  of  the  East  had  preserved  their 
municipal  privileges;  and  the  Greek  population  in  Egypt,  Syria,  and 
Mesopotamia  remained  every  where  completely  separated  from  the  orig 
inal  inhabitants.     Their  corporate  organization  often  afforded  them  an 
opportunity  of  interfering  with  the  details  of  the  public  administration, 
and  their  bold  and  seditious  spirit  enabled  them  to  defend  their  own 
rights  and  interests.    When  the  free  population  of  the  provinces  acquired 
the  rights  of  Roman  citizenship,  the  Greeks  of  these  countries,  who 
formed  the  majority  of  the  privileged  classes,  and  were  already  in  pos 
session  of  the  principal  share  of  the  local  administration,  became  soon 
possessed  of  the  whole  authority  of  the  Roman  government.     They  ap 
peared  as  the  real  representatives  of  the  state,  placed  the  native  popula 
tion  in  the  position  of  a  party  excluded  from  power,  and  consequently 
rendered  it  more  dissatisfied  than  formerly.     In  the  East,  therefore,  after 
the  publication  of  Caracalla's  edict,  the  Greeks  immediately  became 
again  the  dominant  people.3 

XII.  We  will  now  proceed  to  consider  the  literary  productions  of  this 
period  under  the  two  general  heads,  as  we  have  done  in  previous  in 
stances,  of  poetic  and  prose  composition. 

i  Finlay,  I.  c.  2  jd,  #.  3  /d.^ 


442 


GREEK     LITERATURE 


I.     POETRY. 


I.  During  the  period  on  which  we  are  entering,  poetry  in  general  expe 
rienced  a  complete  decline.     Nothing  shows  more  plainly  the  bad  taste 
of  the  age  than  the  choice  of  scientific  subjects  made  by  the  poets  of  the 
time,  in  order  to  cover,  under  an  appearance  of  erudition,  their  want  of 
imagination.     Frequently,  also,  in  order  to  hide  their  own  sterility  of 
ideas,  they  appropriated  to  themselves  entire  verses  and  sentences  taken 
from  the  earlier  poets. 

II.  There  was  one  department,  however,  in  which  the  poets  of  the 
day  employed  themselves  with  more  success,  namely,  epigrammatic  com 
position.     We  have  given  an  historical  sketch  of  the  Greek  Anthology  in 
an  earlier  part  of  the  present  volume  ;  we  will  now  give  a  brief  sketch  of 
the  principal  epigrammatic  poets  of  the  present  period. 

(A.)    EPIGRAM. 

I.  ANTIPATER  ('AvTiVctTpos),  of  Sidon,  the  author  of  several  epigram's  in 
the  Greek  Anthology,  is  commonly  supposed,  from  a  passage  in  Cicero,1 
to  have  been  contemporary  with  Q.  Catulus,  who  was  consul  B.C.  102, 
but  in  all  probability  he  belongs  to  a  somewhat  later  period.     Many  mi 
nute  references  are  made  to  him  by  Meleager,  who  also  wrote  his  epitaph. 
He  lived  to  a  very  advanced  age. 

II.  MELEAGER  (MeAecrypos),2  a  celebrated  writer  and  collector  of  epi 
grams,  was  a  native  of  Gadara,  in  Palestine,  and  lived  about  B.C.  60,  so 
near,  in  fact,  to  the  commencement  of  the  present  period,  that  he  may, 
without  any  great  impropriety,  be  ranked  under  it.     There  are  131  of  his 
epigrams  in  the  Greek  Anthology,  written  in  a  good  Greek  style,  though 
somewhat  affected,  and  marked  by  sophistic  acumen  and  amatory  fancy.3 
They  have  been  published  separately  by  Manso,  Jena,  1789,  8vo,  and  by 
Meineke,  Leipzig,  1811,  8vo. 

III.  PHILODEMUS  (<J»iA<$577,uos),4  of  Gadara,  an  Epicurean  philosopher  and 
epigrammatic  poet,  was  contemporary  with  Cicero,  who  makes  a  violent 
attack  upon  him,  though  without  mentioning  his  name,  as  the  abettor  of 
Piso  in  all  his  profligacy,5  although  elsewhere6  he  speaks  in  high  terms 
of  him  ;  and,  indeed,  in  the  former  passage,  while  attacking  his  character, 
he  praises  his  poetical  skill  and  elegance,  his  knowledge  of  philosophy, 
and  his  general  information,  in  the  highest  terms.     His  epigrams  were 
included  in  the  Anthology  of  Philip  of  Thessalonica,  and  he  seems  to 
have  been  the  earliest  poet  who  had  a  place  in  that  collection.     The 
Greek  Anthology  contains  thirty-four  of  his  pieces,  which  are  chiefly  of  a 
light  and  erotic  character,  and  quite  bear  out  Cicero's  statements  respect 
ing  the  licentiousness  of  his  matter  and  the  elegance  of  his  manner.     Of 
his  prose  writings,  Diogenes  Laertius7  quotes  from  the  tenth  book  TT}S 
TUV  $iXoff6<l>(av  ffwrd^cas,  and  a  MS.  has  been  discovered  at  Herculaneum 
containing  a  work  by  him  on  music,  Trepl 


1  Cic.,  De  Oral  ,  iii.,  50.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Brunck,  Anal.,  vol.  i.,  p.  1,  seqq.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

5  Cic.  in  Pis.,  28,  seq.  6  Id.,  De  Fin.,  ii.,  35.  '  Diog.  Laert.,  x.,  3. 


ROMAN     PERIOD  443 

IV.  ALPHEUS  ('AA^eTos),1  of  Mytilene,  the  author  of  about  twelve  epi 
grams  in  the  Greek  Anthology,  some  of  which  seem  to  point  out  the  time 
when  he  wrote.     In  the  seventh  epigram  he  refers  to  the  state  of  the 
Roman  empire,  as  embracing  almost  all  the  known  world ;  in  the  ninth 
he  speaks  of  the  restored  and  flourishing  city  of  Troy ;  and  in  the  tenth 
he  alludes  to  an  epigram  by  Antipater  of  Sidon.     Hence  it  is  not  improb 
able  that  he  wrote  under  Augustus. 

V.  CRINAGORAS  (Kpivay6pas),s  a  Greek  epigrammatic  poet,  a  native  of 
Mytilene,  among  the  eminent  men  of  which  he  is  mentioned  by  Strabo, 
who  speaks  of  him  as  a  contemporary.3     There  are  several  allusions  in 
his  epigrams  which  refer  to  the  reign  of  Augustus,  and  on  the  authority 
of  which  Jacobs  believes  him  to  have  flourished  from  B.C.  31  to  A.D.  9. 
We  may  also  collect  from  his  epigrams  that  he  lived  at  Rome,*  and  that 
he  was  richer  in  poems  than  in  worldly  goods.5     Crinagoras  often  shows 
a  true  poetical  spirit.     We  have  about  fifty  epigrams  of  his  in  the  Greek 
Anthology. 

VI.  ANTIPATER  ('Aj/riVaTpos),6  of  Thessalonica,  the  author  of  several 
epigrams  in  the  Greek  Anthology,  lived,  as  we  may  infer  from  some  of 
them,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Augustus  (B.C.  10  and  onward), 
and  perhaps  till  the  reign  of  Caligula  (A.D.  38).     He  is  probably  the  same 
poet  who  is  called,  in  the  titles  of  several  epigrams,  u  Antipater  Maccdo." 

VII.  PHILIPPUS  (*iAi7T7ros),7  of  Thessalonica,  an  epigrammatic  poet, 
who,  besides  composing  a  large  number  of  epigrams  himself,  compiled 
one  of  the  ancient  Greek  anthologies.     The  whole  number  of  epigrams 
ascribed  to  him  in  the  Greek  Anthology  is  nearly  ninety,  but  of  these  six 
(Nos.  36-41)  ought  to  be  ascribed  to  Lucillius,  and  a  few  others  are  man 
ifestly  borrowed  from  earlier  poets,  while  others,  again,  are  mere  imita 
tions.     They  include  nearly  all  the  different  classes  of  subjects  treated 
of  in  Greek  epigrammatic  poetry.     Various  allusions  in  these  epigrams 
prove  that  he  lived  after  the  time  of  Augustus. 

VIII.  ANTIPHILUS  ('Afn^tAos),8  of  Byzantium,  lived  about  the  time  of 
the  Emperor  Nero,  as  appears  from  one  of  his  epigrams,  in  which  he 
mentions  the  favor  conferred  by  that  emperor  upon  the  island  of  Rhodes. 
The  number  of  his  epigrams  still  extant  is  upward  of  forty,  and  most  of 
them  are  superior  in  conception  and  style  to  the  majority  of  these  com 
positions.     Reiske,  in  his  notes  on  the  Anthology  of  Cephalus,  wras  led 
by  the  difference  of  style  in  some  of  the  poems  bearing  the  name  of  An- 
tiphilus  to  suppose  that  there  were  two  or  three  poets  of  this  name,  and 
that  their  productions  were  all,  by  mistake,  ascribed  to  the  one  poet  of 
Byzantium.     But  there  is  not  sufficient  ground  for  such  an  hypothesis. 

IX.  LUCILLIUS  (Aou/aAA:os),9  a  poet  of  the  Greek  Anthology,  edited  two 
books  of  epigrams.     In  the  Anthology  124  epigrams  are  ascribed  to  him, 
but  of  these  the  Vatican  MS.  assigns  the  118th  to  Lucian,  and  the  96th 
and  134th  to  Palladas.     This  authority,  therefore,  removes  the  founda 
tion  for  the  inferences  respecting  the  poet's  date,  which  Lessing  and  Fa- 

1  Jacobs,  Anth.  Grcsc.,  xiii.,  p.  839.         2  Id.  ib.,  p.  876,  seqq.         3  Strab.,  xiii.,  p.  617. 
4  Ep.  24.  s  EP.  23.  e  Jacobs,  Anth.  GroBc.,  xiii.,  p.  848,  seq. 

7  Id.  ib.,  p.  934,  seqq.  8  Id.  ib.,  p.  851,  seqq.  9  Id.  ib.,  xiii.,  p.  912,  seqq. 


444  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

bricius  drew  from  the  mention  of  the  physician  Magnus,  in  the  124th 
epigram.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Vatican  MS.  assigns  to  Lucillius 
the  16th  epigram  of  Ammianus,  the  36th  and  41st  of  Philip,  the  108th 
anonymous,  and  the  23d  of  Leonidas  of  Alexandrea.  From  the  last  epi 
gram  (which  is  also  far  more  in  the  style  of  Lucillius  than  of  Leonidas) 
it  appears  that  the  poet  lived  under  Nero,  and  that  he  received  money 
from  this  emperor.  Nearly  all  his  epigrams  are  sportive,  and  many  of 
them  are  aimed  at  the  grammarians,  who  at  that  time  abounded  at  Rome. 

X.  LEONIDAS  (Aewj/fSas),1  of  Alexandrea,  was  born,  as  he  informs  us, 
on  the  banks  of  the  Nile,  whence  he  went  to  Rome,  and  there  taught 
grammar  for  a  long  time,  without  attracting  any  notice,  but  ultimately 
he  became  very  popular,  and  obtained  the  patronage  of  the  imperial  fam 
ily.      His  epigrams  show  that  he  flourished  under  Nero,  and  probably 
down  to  the  reign  of  Vespasian.     In  the  Anthology,  forty-three  epigrams 
are  ascribed  to  him  ;  but  some  of  these  belong  to  Leonidas  of  Tarentum, 
who  appears  to  have  lived  in  the  time  of  Pyrrhus.     Several  of  his  epi 
grams  are  marked  by  the  petty  conceit  of  having  an  equal  number  of  let 
ters  in  each"  distich  ;  these  are  called  tV<ty>?</>a  ^Triypd/jL/j.ara.    Consult  Mei- 
neke,  "  Prolusio  ad  utriusque  Leonida  carmina,"  Leipzig,  1791. 

XI.  AMMIANUS  ('A/x/iuapos),2  a  Greek  epigrammatist,  but  probably  a  Ro 
man  by  birth.     The  Greek  Anthology  contains  twenty-seven  epigrams  by 
him,  to  which  must  be  added  another  contained  in  the  Vatican  MS.,  and 
another  which  is  placed  among  the  anonymous  epigrams,  but  which  some 
MSS.  assign  to  Ammianus.     They  are  all  of  a  facetious  character.     He 
was  contemporary  with  the  epigrammatist  Lucillius,  who  lived  under 
Nero.     We  find  also  from  some  of  his  epigrams  that  he  was  contempo 
rary  with  the  sophist  Antonius  Polemo,  who  flourished  under  Trajan  and 
Hadrian. 

XII.  MESOMEDES  (Meo-o^S^s),  a  lyric  and  epigrammatic  poet  under 
Hadrian  and  the  Antonines.     He  was  a  native  of  Crete,  and  a  freedman 
of  Hadrian,  whose  favorite,  Antinous,  he  celebrated  in  a  poem.3     A*  sal 
ary  which  he  had  received  from  Hadrian  was  diminished  by  Antoninus 
Pius.*    Three  poems  of  his  are  preserved  in  the  Anthology,  one  of  which 
is  a  short  hymn  to  Nemesis.     This  hymn  was  published  for  the  first  time, 
with  the  ancient  musical  notes,  by  Fell,  at  the  end  of  his  edition  of  Ara- 
tus,  Oxford,  1672,  8vo ;  afterward  by  Burette,  in  the  fifth  volume  of  the 
Memoires  de  VA.cademie  des  Inscr.  et  Belles  Lettres ;  by  Brunck,  in  his  An- 
(dccta^vol.  ii.,  p.  292;  by  Snedorf,  " De  hymnis  veterum  Gracorum"  Haf- 
niae,  1786,  8vo ;  and  by  Bellermann,  along  with  those  of  Dionysius,  Ber 
lin,  1840. 

XIII.  NESTOR  (NeVrcup),5  of  Laranda,  in  Lycia,  according  to  Suidas;  in 
Lycaonia,  according  to  Strabo  and  Stephanus  Byzantinus.     He  lived  in 
the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Severus,  between  A.D.  194  and  211.     Four 
fragments  of  his  writings  are  inserted  in  the  Anthology.6     The  fourth  of 
these  has  point,  and  rebukes  men  for  attempting  poetry  who  are  un 
skilled  in  the  art.    He  is  mentioned  by  Suidas  as  an  epic  poet  also.    We 

1  Jacobs,  Anthol.  Grace.,  p.  908,  scq.  2  Id.  ib.,  xi.,  p.  312,  seqq.  3  Suid.,  s.  v. 

*  Capital.,  Ant.  Pius,  7.         *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.        6  Vol.  iii.,  p.  54,  ed.  Jacobs. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  445 

infer  from  Stephanas  Byzantinus  that  he  wrote  a  poem  called  'AA,e|ai>- 
Speias,  "  On  the  Deeds  of  Alexander,"  to  which  Suidas  probably  refers. 
This  last-mentioned  writer  also  informs  us  that  Nestor  composed  an  Il 
iad,  omitting  in  each  book  the  letter  indicating  its  number,  as,  in  the  first 
book,  the  letter  a,  in  the  second  the  letter  £„  and  so  on  with  the  rest 
through  the  whole  twenty-four  books.  The  epithet  applied  to  such  sin 
gular  productions  is  \enroypd/j,/jiaTos,  this  being  called  an  'I\ias  Xenroypd/j.- 
HUTOS.  He  wrote  also  a  poem  entitled  MeTa,uop</>a>(rejs. 

XIV.  STRATO  (^Tparw),  of  Sardis,  an  epigrammatic  poet,  and  the  com 
piler  of  an  anthology,  composed  of  epigrams  from  the  earlier  anthologies 
of  Meleager  and  Philip  (to  which  we  have  referred  in  another  part  of 
this  work),  and  from  other  sources,  and  some  from  the  pen  of  Strato 
himself.     The  whole  number  of  poems  in  the  collection  is  258,  of  which 
ninety-eight  are  by  Strato.     Some  of  ttie  epigrams  of  Strato  are  elegant 
and  clever,  but  nothing  can  redeem  the  disgrace  attaching  to  the  moral 
character  of  his  compilation.1 

XV.  DIOGENES  LAERTIUS  (Ato-yeV^s  6  Aaeprios  or  Aaepriet/s,  sometimes 
also  written  Aaeprios  AtoyeVr/s),  to  whom  we  shall  presently  come  in  our 
account  of  the  prose  writers  of  this  period,  was  also  a  writer  of  epigrams. 
Many  of  these  are  interspersed  in  his  biographies.     They  were  collected 
together  in  a  separate  work,  and  divided  into  several  books.     The  collec 
tion  bore  the  title  of  ird^erpos.     The  remains  which  we  have  at  the 
present  day  are  below  mediocrity,  and  not  only  insipid,  but  generally  de 
ficient  in  good  taste. 

(B.)    DIDACTIC    POETRY. 

*  The  most  worthy  of  notice  among  the  didactic  poets  of  this  period  are 
DIONYSIUS,  surnamed  Periegetes  (6  nepw^Tj-Hjs),  OPPIANUS,  and  MARCELLUS 
Sidetes. 

I.  DICTNYSIUS  (Aioj/y(nos),a  surnamed  Periegetes,  from  his  being  the  au 
thor  of  a  ireptTiyTiffts  rfjs  yrjs,  in  hexameter  verse,  and  still  extant.  Re 
specting  his  age  and  country  the  most  different  opinions  have  been  enter 
tained,  though  all  critics  are  agreed  in  placing  him  after  the  Christian 
era,  or  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  emperors,  as  must,  indeed,  be  neces 
sarily  inferred  from  passages  of  the  Periegesis  itself,  such  as  v.  355, 
where  the  author  speaks  of  his  fti/cwcres,  that  is,  his  sovereigns,  which  only 
apply  to  the  emperors.  But  the  question  which  emperor  or  emperors 
Dionysius  there  alludes  to  has  been  answered  in  the  most  different  ways. 
Some  writers  have  placed  him  in  the  reign  of  Augustus,  others  in  that 
of  Nero,  and  others,  again,  under  Marcus  Aurelius  and  L.  Verus,  or  under 
Septimius  Severus  and  his  sons.  Eustathius,  his  commentator,  was  him 
self  in  doubt  about  the  age  of  his  author.  But  these  uncertainties  have 
been  removed  by  Bernhardy,  one  of  the  most  recent  editors  of  Dionysius, 
who  has  made  it  highly  probable,  partly  from  the  names  of  countries  and 
nations  mentioned  in  the  Periegesis,  partly  from  the  mention  of  the  Huns 
in  v.  730,  and  partly  from  the  general  character  of  the  poem,  that  its  au 
thor  must  have  lived  either  in  the  latter  part  of  the  third,  or  in  the  begin- 

1  Jacobs,  Anth.  Grac.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  68,  seqq.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  t>. 


446  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ning  of  the  fourth  century  of  our  era.  Eustathius1  and  the  scholiast8 
expressly  call  him  a  native  of  Africa.  Suidas  infers,  without  much  foun 
dation  for  it,  that  he  was  born  at  Byzantium. 

The  Periegcsis  of  Dionysius  contains  a  description  of  the  whole  earth, 
so  far  as  it  was  known  in  his  time,  in  hexameter  verse,  and  the  author 
appears  chiefly  to  follow  the  views  of  Eratosthenes.  It  is  written  in  a 
terse  and  neat  style,  and  enjoyed  a  high  degree  of  popularity  in  ancient 
times,  as  we  may  infer  from  the  fact  that  two  translations  or  paraphrases 
of  it  were  made  by  Romans,  one  by  Rufus  Festus  Avienus,  and  the  other 
by  the  grammarian  Priscian.  Eustathius  wrote  a  very  valuable  com 
mentary  upon  it,  which  is  still  extant,  and  we  farther  possess  a  Greek 
paraphrase  and  scholia.  Besides  the  Periegesis,  Eustathius  states  that 
other  works  also  were  attributed  to  Dionysius,  namely,  \iOu<d,  o 
and  fiao-o-apiitd,  the  latter  term  meaning  the  same  as 


The  first  edition  of  the  Periegesis  appeared  at  Ferrara,  1512,  4to,  with  a  Latin  transla 
tion.  Aldus  Manutius  next  brought  out  an  edition  of  it,  Venice,  1513,  8vo,  together  with 
Pindar,  Callimachus,  and  Lycophron.  H.  Stephens  incorporated  it  in  his  "  Poetas  Prin- 
cipes  Heroici  Carminis,"  Paris,  1566,  fol.  One  of  the  most  useful  among  the  subsequent 
editions  is  that  of  Thwaites,  Oxford,  1697,  8vo,  with  the  commentary  of  Eustathius,  the 
Greek  scholia,  and  paraphrase.  It  is  also  printed  in  the  fourth  volume  of  Hudson's 
Geogr.  Minor.,  Oxford,  1712,  8vo,  from  which  it  was  reprinted  separately,  Oxford,  1710, 
and  1717,  8vo  ;  edited  also  by  Passow,  Leipzig,  1825,  12mo.  But  all  the  previous  edi 
tions  are  superseded  by  that  of  Bernhardy,  Leipzig,  1828,  8vo,  which  forms  vol.  i.  of  a 
contemplated  collection  of  the  minor  Greek  geographers.  It  is  accompanied  by  a  very 
excellent  and  learned  dissertation,  and  the  ancient  commentators. 

II.  OPPIANUS  (JOiririav6s).a  Under  this  name  there  are  extant  two  Greek 
hexameter  poems,  one  on  fishing,  entitled  'AA/eim/co,  and  the  other  on 
hunting,  Kw^en/ca;  as  also  a  prose  paraphrase  of  a  third  poem  on  hawk 
ing,  'I|evn/cd,  These  were,  till  toward  the  end  of  the  last  century,  uni 
versally  attributed  to  the  same  person  ;  an  opinion  which  not  only  made 
it  impossible  to  reconcile  with  each  other  all  the  passages  relative  to  Op- 
pian  that  are  to  be  found  in  ancient  writers,  but  also  rendered  contradic 
tory  the  evidence  derived  from  the  perusal  of  the  poems  themselves.  At 
length,  in  the  year  1776,  I.  G.  Schneider,  in  his  first  edition  of  these  po 
ems,  threw  out  the  conjecture  that  they  were  not  written  by  the  same 
individual,  but  by  two  persons  of  the  same  name,  who  have  been'  con 
stantly  confounded  together  ;  an  hypothesis  which,  if  not  absolutely  free 
from  objections,  certainly  removes  so  many  difficulties,  and,  moreover, 
affords  so  convenient  a  mode  of  introducing  various  facts  and  remarks, 
which  would  otherwise  be  inconsistent  and  contradictory,  that  it  will  here 
be  adopted. 

The  writer  of  the  "  Halieutica"  is  said  by  probably  all  authorities  to 
have  been  born  in  Cilicia,  though  they  are  not  so  well  agreed  as  to  the 
name  of  his  native  city.  Suidas  says  Corycus,  and  this  appears  to  be 
confirmed  by  Oppian  himself*  Respecting  his  date  there  has  been  equal 
difference  of  opinion.  Athenseus  says  that  he  lived  shortly  before  his 
own  time,  which  will  make  him  to  have  flourished  about  A.D.  180.  The 

1  Ad.  v.  7.  2  Ad.  v.  8. 

3  Greenhill;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Opp.,  Hal,  iii.,  205,  seqq. 


ROMAN      PERIOD.  447 

"  Halieutica"  consists  of  about  3500  hexameters,  divided  into  five  books, 
of  which  the  first  two  treat  of  the  natural  history  of  fishes,  and  the  othei 
three  of  the  art  of  fishing.  The  author  displays  in  parts  considerable  zo 
ological  knowledge,  but  inserts  also  several  fables  and  absurdities.  In 
this  respect,  however,  he  was  not  more  credulous  than  most  of  his  con 
temporaries,  and  many  of  his  stories  are  copied  by  Julian  and  other  writ 
ers.  Among  the  zoological  points  in  the  poem  that  are  most  worthy  of 
notice,  we  may  mention  the  following.  He  mentions  (i.,  217,  seqq.)  the 
story  of  the  remora  or  sucker  (ex6J/w)  being  able  to  stop  a  ship  when  un 
der  full  sail  by  sticking  to  the  keel ;  he  was  aware  of  the  peculiarity  of 
the  cancellus  or  hermit-crab  (/cap/ai/as),  which  is  provided  with  no  shell  of 
its  own,  but  seizes  upon  the  first  empty  one  it  can  find  (i.,  320,  segq.) ;  he 
gives  a  beautiful  and  correct  description  of  the  nautilus  (i.,  338,  seqq.) ; 
he  notices  the  numbness  caused  by  the  touch  of  the  torpedo  (j/ap/oj),  and 
the  black  fluid  emitted  by  the  sepia  or  cuttle-fish,  by  means  of  which  it 
escapes  its  pursuers  (iii.,  156,  scqq.) :  he  several  times  mentions  the  dol 
phin;  calls  it,  for  its  swiftness  and  beauty,  the  king  among  fishes;  and 
relates  an  anecdote,  similar  to  those  mentioned  by  Pliny,  of  its  attach 
ment  to  a  little  boy. 

In  point  of  style  and  language,  as  well  as  poetical  embellishment,  the 
"  Halieutica"  is  so  much  superior  to  the  "  Cynegetica"  that  Schneider 
(as  we  have  seen)  considers  this  fact  to  furnish  the  strongest  proof  in 
favor  of  his  hypothesis ;  and  it  is  probable  that  the  greater  part  of  the 
praise  that  has  been  bestowed  upon  Oppian,  in  a  poetical  point  of  view, 
should  be  considered  as  referring  to  this  poem  only.  A  paraphrase  of 
the  "  Halieutica"  in  Greek  prose,  bearing  the  name  of  Eutecnius,  is  still 
in  existence  in  several  European  libraries,  but  has  never  been  published. 

The  author  of  the  "  Cyncgetica"  was  a  native  of  Apamea  or  Pella,  in 
Syria,  as  he  himself  plainly  tells  us.1  The  poem  is  addressed  to  Cara- 
calla,  probably  after  he  had  been  associated  with  his  father  in  the  empire, 
A.D.  198,  and  before  the  death  of  the  latter,  A.D.  211.  The  "  Cynegeti- 
ca"  consist  of  about  2100  hexameters,  divided  into  four  books.  The  last 
of  these  is  imperfect,  and  perhaps  a  fifth  book  may  also  have  been  lost, 
as  the  anonymous  author  of  the  life  of  Oppian  says  the  poem  consisted 
of  that  number  of  books,  though  Suidas  mentions  only  four.  The  follow 
ing  zoological  points  mentioned  in  the  poem  are  perhaps  the  most  inter 
esting.  He  says  expressly  that  the  tusks  of  the  elephant  are  not  teeth, 
but  horns  (ii.,  491) ;  that  the  bear  brings  forth  her  cubs  half  formed,  and 
licks  them  into  shape  (iii.,  159) ;  he  gives  a  very  spirited  description  of 
the  giraffe  (iii.,  461),  the  exactness  of  which  is  in  some  points  remark 
able.  That  the  animal  must  have  been  seen  alive  by  Oppian  is  evident 
from  his  remark  on  the  brilliancy  of  the  eyes,  and  the  halting  motion  of 
the  hinder  limbs.  In  style,  language,  and  poetical  merit,  the  "  Cynegeti- 
ca?'  is  far  inferior  to  the  "  Halieutica."* 

With  respect  to  the  poem  on  hawking,  'I|eim«:a,  if  it  is  to  be  attribu 
ted  to  either  of  the  Oppians,  it  probably  belongs  to  the  younger ;  but 
Schneider  considers  that  it  is  more  probably  the  work  of  Dionysius.    The 
1  Opp.,  Cyneget.,  ii.,  125,  seqq.  *  GreenJiill,  I  c. 


448 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


poem  itself,  which  is  said  to  have  consisted  of  five  books,  is  no  longer 
extant,  but  there  is  a  Greek  prose  paraphrase  of  three  books  by  Eutecnius. 

The  Halieutica  and  Cynegetica  are  usually  published  together.  The  earliest  edi 
tion  of  both  poems  is  the  Aldine,  Venice,  1517,  8vo,  containing  the  Greek  text,  with  the 
Latin  translation  of  the  Halieutica,  by  Lippius.  The  most  complete  edition  that  has 
hitherto  been  published  is  that  by  Schneider,  Strasburg,  1776,  8vo,  Greek  and  Latin, 
with  copious  and  learned  notes,  containing  also  the  Greek  paraphrase  of  the  'IfeuTiKa. 
The  editor  published  some  additional  notes  and  observations  in  his  Analecta  Critica. 
Frankfort,  1777,  8vo.  This  edition  was  executed  when  Schneider  was  a  young  man,  in 
conjunction  with  Brunck,  who  assisted  him  in  the  Cynegetica ;  and  accordingly  it  ex 
hibits  many  bold  corrections  of  the  text,  which  he  withdrew  in  his  second  edition,  pub 
lished  in  1813,  Leipzig,  8vo.  This  edition  is  unfinished,  and  contains  only  the  Greek 
text  of  the  two  poems,  Peifer's  Latin  translation  of  the  Cynegetica,  some  short  notes  re 
lating  to  the  text,  and  a  preface  in  which  Schneider  repeats  his  conviction  that  the 
Halieutica  and  Cynegetica  were  written  by  two  different  persons,  and  replies  to  the  ob 
jections  of  Belin  de  Ballu.  The  latest  edition  of  the  two  poems  is  that  published  in  Di- 
dot's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  together  with  Nicander,  Marcellus  Sidetes,  &c.,  edited  by  F.  S. 
Lehrs,  with  a  preface  by  K.  Lehrs,  who  completed  the  work  after  his  brother's  early 
death.  It  contains  the  Greek  text  with  a  Latin  prose  translation,  and  also  the  Greek 
paraphrase  of  the  'l£eim«a,  with  a  Latin  version.  The  scholia  on  the  two  poems  were 
published  in  a  separate  volume  of  the  Bibliotheca  Gr&ca  (Paris,  1849),  along  with  those 
on  Theocritus  anfl  Nicander,  under  the  editorial  supervision  of  Bussemaker. 

The  Halieutica  were  published  separately  by  Junta,  Florence,  1515,  8vo  (a  book  valu 
able  not  only  for  its  rarity,  but  also  for  the  correctness  of  the  text),  and  by  Plantin,  un 
der  the  editorial  care  of  Rittershusius,  Leyden,  1597,  8vo.  The  earliest  edition  of  the 
Greek  text  of  the  Cynegetica,  apart  from  the  Halieutica,  appeared  in  1549,  4to,  Paris,  ap. 
Vascosanum.  It  was  also  published  by  Belin  de  Ballu,  Strasburg,  1786,  Greek  and  Lat 
in,  with  learned  notes,  too  often  deformed  by  personal  controversy  with  Schneider. 
The  editor  intended  to  publish  the  Halieutica  in  a  second  volume,  but  of  this  only  forty 
pages  were  printed,  which  are  rarely  to  be  met  with. 

III.  MARCELLUS  SIDETES  (Ma/weAAoy  SiSrjrTjs),1  a  native  of  Side,  in  Pam- 
phylia,  was  born  toward  the  end  of  the  first  century  after  Christ,  and 
lived  in  the  reigns  of  Hadrian  and  Antoninus  Pius,  A.D.  117-161.  He 
wrote  a  long  medical  poem  in  Greek  hexameters,  consisting  of  forty-two 
books,  which  was  held  in  such  estimation  that  it  was  ordered  by  the  em 
perors  to  be  placed  in  the  public  libraries  at  Rome.  Of  this  work  only 
two  fragments  remain,  one  Ilepl  AvKavOpwirov,  "  De  Lycanthropia,"  and  the 
other  '\arpiKa  Trepl  IxQvcov,  "  De  remediis  ex  piscibus."  Of  these  the  former 
is  preserved  (but  in  prose)  by  Aetius,2  and  is  curious  and  interesting. 
The  second  fragment  is  less  interesting,  and  consists  of  101  verses.  It 
was  first  published  in  a  separate  form,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  by  Morell, 
Paris,  1591,  8vo.  The  latest  edition  is  that  contained  in  Didot's  Bibliothe 
ca  Graca,  with  Nicander,  Oppian,  &c.,  edited  by  Lehrs,  Paris,  1846,  8vo. 

In  connection  with  didactic  poetry,  the  subject  of  Fable  naturally  pre 
sents  itself.  This  whole  subject,  however,  has  been  discussed  in  an  ear 
lier  part  of  the  present  volume,  where  a  sketch  is  also  given  of  Babrius, 
the  most  distinguished  writer  of  fable  during  the  period  under  review. 
We  will  therefore  pass  to  epic  poetry. 

1  Greenhill;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

2  Act.,  ii.,  2, 11,  p.  254.    Compare  Paul.  jEg-in.,  Hi.,  16 ;  Adams,  ad  loc. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  449 


(C.)    EPIC    POETRY. 

QUINTUS  SMYRN^US  ( K6'ivros  2/J.vpvaios ),*  commonly  called  QUINTUS 
CALABER,  from  the  circumstance  that  the  first  copy  through  which  his 
poem  became  known  was  found  in  a  convent  at  Otranto,  in  Calabria, 
was  the  author  of  a  poem  in  fourteen  books,  entitled  ra  ^"Op.-npov,  or 
TrapaAennfytej/a  'Op-hpa.  Scarcely  any  thing  is  known  of  his  personal  his 
tory  ;  but  from  the  metrical  and  poetic  characteristics  of  his  poem,  as 
compared  with  the  school  of  Nonnus,  it  appears  most  probable  that  he 
lived  toward  the  middle  of  the  fourth  century  after  Christ,  or  about  the 
close  of  the  present  period.  From  a  passage  in  his  poem  (xii.,  308-313), 
it  would  seem  that  even  in  early  life  he  made  trial  of  his  poetic  powers, 
while  engaged  in  tending  sheep  near  a  temple  of  Diana,  in  the  territory 
of  Smyrna.  The  matters  treated  of  in  his  poem  are  the  events  of  the 
Trojan  war,  from  the  death  of  Hector  to  the  return  of  the  Greeks.  It 
begins  rather  abruptly  with  a  description  of  the  grief  and  consternation 
at  the  death  of  Hector  which  reigned  among  the  Trojans,  and  then  intro 
duces  Penthesilea,  queen  of  the  Amazons,  who  comes  to  their  aid.  In 
the  second  book  we  have  the  arrival,  exploits,  and  death  of  Memnon ;  in 
the  third  the  death  of  Achilles.  The  fourth  and  fifth  books  describe  the 
funeral  games  in  honor  of  Achilles,  the  contest  about  his  arms,  and  the 
death  of  Ajax.  In  the  sixth  book  Neoptolemus  is  sent  for  by  the  Greeks, 
and  Eurypylus  comes  to  the  aid  of  the  Trojans.  The  seventh  and  eighth 
books  describe  the  arrival  and  exploits  of  Neoptolemus ;  the  ninth  con 
tains  the  exploits  of  Dei'phobus,  and  the  sending  for  Philoctetes  by  the 
Greeks.  The  tenth,  the  death  of  Paris  and  the  suicide  of  CEnone,  who 
had  refused  to  heal  him.  The  eleventh  book  narrates  the  last  unsuccess 
ful  attempt  of  the  Greeks  to  carry  Ilium  by  storm  ;  the  twelfth  and  thir 
teenth  describe  the  capture  of  the  city  by  means  of  the  wooden  horse  ; 
the  fourteenth,  the  rejoicing  of  the  Greeks,  the  reconciliation  of  Menelaus 
and  Helen,  the  sacrifice  of  Polyxena  at  the  tomb  of  Achilles,  the  embark 
ation  of  the  Greeks,  the  scattering  of  their  ships,  and  the  death  of  the 
Oilean  Ajax.2 

In  phraseology,  similes,  and  other  technicalities,  Quintus  closely  copied 
Homer.  The  materials  for  his  poem  he  found  in  the  works  of  the  earlier 
poets  of  the  epic  cycle.  But  not  a  single  poetical  idea  of  his  own  seems 
ever  to  have  inspired  him.  He  was  incapable  of  understanding  or  appro 
priating  any  thing  except  the  majestic  flow  of  the  language  of  the  ancient 
epos.  His  gods  and  heroes  are  alike  devoid  of  character  ;  every  thing  like 
pathos  or  moral  interest  was  quite  beyond  his  powers.  Of  similes  (not 
very  original  in  their  character)  he  makes  copious  use.  With  respect  to 
chronology,  his  poem  is  as  punctual  as  a  diary.  But  his  style  is  clear, 
and  marked,  on  the  whole,  by  purity  and  good  taste,  without  any  bombast 
or  exaggeration.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  work  of  Quintus 
Smyrnaeus  is  nothing  more  than  an  amplification  or  remodelling  of  the 
poems  of  Arctinus  and  Lesches.  It  is  clear  that  he  had  access  to  the 
same  sources  as  Virgil,  though  there  is  nothing  from  which  it  would  ap- 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  jd.t  I.  c. 


450  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

pear  that  he  had  the  Roman  poet  before  his  eyes.     He  appears,  however, 
to  have  made  diligent  use  of  Apollonius. 

The  first  edition  of  Quintus  was  published  by  Aldus  Manutius,  in  1504  or  1505,  from 
a  very  faulty  MS.  Rhodomannus,  who  spent  thirty  years  upon  the  correction  and  ex 
planation  of  the  text  of  Quintus,  published  an  improved  edition  in  1604.  The  standard 
edition,  however,  for  a  long  time,  was  that  of  Tychsen,  Strasburg,  1807,  8vo,  founded 
on  a  collation  of  all  the  extant  MSS.  Recently,  an  edition  of  Quintus  has  appeared  in 
Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graeca,  Paris,  1840,  by  Lehrs,  along  with  Hesiod,  Apollonius,  &c. 
The  text  of  this  edition  is  very  much  improved.  The  latest  and  best  edition,  however, 
is  that  of  Kochly,  Leipzig,  1850,  8vo. 

II.    PROSE. 

The  prose  writers  of  this  period  are  numerous,  and  may  be  classified 
as  follows:  1.  Historians.  2.  Rhetoricians  and  Sophists.  3.  Writers  of 
works  of  fiction.  4.  Grammarians  and  Lexicographers.  5.  Philosophers.  6. 
Mathematicians.  7.  Geographers.  8.  Medical  writers. 

(A.)  HISTORIANS. 

I.  CASTOR  (Kao-rwp),1  either  a  native  of  Rhodes,  of  Massilia,  or  of  Gala- 
tia,  was  a  contemporary  of  Cicero  and  Julius  Caesar,  and  received  the 
surname  of  3>i\opu>fjMios,  on  account  of  his  partiality  toward  the  Romans. 
He  wrote,  according  to  Suidas,  1.  'Avaypaffi  rS>v  d-aAao-o-o/c/jaTTjo-cw/Twi/,  in 
two  hooks.     2.  XpovLKa  dyyoTjjuara,  referred  to  also  by  Apollodorus.     3. 
riejn  tVixeipT/juaTcoi/,  in  nine  books.     4.  Tlepl  ireiflous,  in  two  books.     5.  Uepl 
TOV  NeiAoy.     6.  Te'x^Tj  pT}TopiK^  of  which  a  portion  is  still  extant,  and 
printed  in  Walz's  Rhetores  Gr<zci  (iii.,  p.  712,  seqq.).     To  these  productions 
Clinton2  adds  a  great  chronological  work  (XpoviKa  or  Xpovoboyia'),  in  six 
books,  which  is  referred  to  several  times  by  Eusebius,  though  it  is  not 
certain  whether  this  is  not  the  same  work  as  the  Xpovnta  cfyyoTj^ara  men 
tioned  above.     He  is  frequently  referred  to  as  an  authority  in  historical 
matters,  though  no  strictly  historical  work  is  specified,  so  that  those  ref 
erences  may  allude  to  any  of  the  above-mentioned  works.     Neither  is  it 
known  where  he  showed  his  partiality  for  the  Romans,  though  it  may 
have  been  in  a  work  mentioned  by  Plutarch,3  in  which  he  compared  the 
institutions  of  the  Romans  with  those  of  Pythagoras.     Miiller,  however, 
refers  it  to  his  conduct  in  the  Mithradatic  war  of  Pompey.     None  of  his 
works  are  extant,  except  some  fragments,  collected  by  C.  Miiller,  at  the 
end  of  Herodotus,  in  Didot's  Bibl.  Grteca,  Paris,  1844. 

II.  THEOPHANES  (eeot/xw'Tjs),4  of  Mytilene,  in  Lesbos,  a  learned  Greek, 
and  one  of  the  most  intimate  friends  of  Pompey,5  who  presented  to  him 
the  Roman  franchise  in  the  presence  of  his  army,  after  a  speech  in  which 
he  eulogized  his  merits.     He  came  to  Rome  with  Pompey,  and,  on  the 
breaking  out  of  the  civil  war,  he  accompanied  his  patron  to  Greece. 
After  the  battle  of  Pharsalia,  he  fled  with  Pompey  from  Greece,  and  it 
was  owing  to  his  advice  that  the  latter  went  to  Egypt.6     After  the  death 

'  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Fast.  Hell.,  iii.,  p. 546. 

3  Qucest.  Rom.,  10,  76.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

5  Compare  Cass.,  Bell.  Civ.,  iii.,  18  ;  Strab.,  xiii.,  p.  617 ;  Cic.,  Ep.  ad  Att.,  ii ,  5, 12, 17. 
•  Plut.,  Pomp.,  76,  78. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  451 

of  his  patron,  Theophanes  took  refuge  in  Italy,  and  was  pardoned  by  Cae 
sar.  He  wrote  the  history  of  Pompey's  campaigns,  in  which  he  repre 
sented  the  exploits  of  his  hero  in  the  most  favorable  light,  and  did  not 
hesitate,  as  Plutarch  more  than  hints,  to  invent  a  false  tale  for  the  pur 
pose  of  injuring  the  reputation  of  an  enemy  of  the  Pompeian  family.  He 
was  still  alive  in  B.C.  44,  as  we  see  from  one  of  Cicero's  letters,1  and 
may  therefore,  without  any  impropriety,  be  ranked,  like  Castor,  under 
the  present  period.  His  work  is  lost. 

III.  TIMAGENES  (Ttjuc^eVTjs),2  a  rhetorician  and  historian,  was  a  native 
of  Alexandrea,  whence  he  was  carried  as  a  prisoner  to  Rome,  B.C.  55, 
where  he  was  first  employed  as  a  slave  in  menial  offices ;  but  being  liber 
ated  by  Faustus  Sulla,  the  son  of  the  dictator,  he  opened  a  school  of 
rhetoric,  in  which  he  taught  with  great  success.     The  Emperor  Augustus 
induced  him  to  write  a  history  of  his  exploits  ;  but,  having  offended  the 
monarch  by  sarcastic  remarks  upon  his  family,  he  was  forbidden  the  pal 
ace  ;  whereupon  he  burned  his  historical  works,  gave  up  his  rhetorical 
school,  and  retired  to  the  house  of  his  friend  Asinius  Pollio,  at  Tusculum. 
After  he  had  discontinued  writing  a  long  while,  he  resumed  his  pen,  and 
composed  several  historical  works,  upon  which  his  fame  was  founded. 
He  afterward  went  to  the  East,  and  died  at  Dabanum,  in  Mesopotamia. 
The  works  of  Timagenes  mentioned  by  the  ancient  writers  are,  1.  Uepi- 
TTA.OUF,  from  which  Strabo,  on  one  occasion,  is  supposed  to  quote.     2.  riepl 
£a<riAeW,  which  appears  to  have  contained  a  history  of  Alexander  the 
Great  and  his  successors.     3.  A  work  on  the  Gauls.     All  his  works  are 
lost. 

IV.  JUBA  ('I6fias),3  king  of  Mauritania,  son  of  Juba,  king  of  Numidia, 
was  a  mere  child  at  his  father's  death,  was  carried  a  prisoner  to  Rome 
by  Caesar,  and  compelled  to  grace  the  conqueror's  triumph.*    He  was 
brought  up  in  Italy,  where  he  received  an  excellent  education,  and  ap 
plied  himself  with  such  diligence  to  study  that  he  turned  out  one  of  the 
most  learned  men  of  the  day.     After  the  death  of  Antony,  B.C.  30,  Au 
gustus  conferred  on  Juba  his  paternal  kingdom  of  Numidia,  and  at  the 
same  time  gave  him  in  marriage  Cleopatra,  otherwise  called  Selene,  the 
daughter  of  Antony  and  Cleopatra.5     At  a  subsequent  period  (B.C.  25), 
Augustus  gave  him  Mauritania  in  exchange  for  Numidia,  which  was  re 
duced  to  a  Roman  province.     He  continued  to  reign  in  Mauritania  till 
his  death,  which  happened  about  A.D.  19.     He  was  beloved  by  his  sub 
jects,  among  whom  he  endeavored  to  introduce  the  elements  of  Greek 
and  Roman  civilization.     Juba  wrote  a  great  number  of  works  in  almost, 
every  branch  of  literature.     They  are  all  lost,  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
fragments.     They  appear  to  have  been  all  written  in  Greek.     The  most 
important  of  them  were,  1.  A  History  of  Africa  (At/Su/m),  in  which  he  made 
use  of  Punic  authorities.     2.  On  the  Assyrians  (Uepl  'AtrtrupiW),  in  two 
books,  in  which  he  followed  the  authority  of  Berosus.     3.  A  History  of 
Arabia,  which  he  addressed  to  C.  Caesar,  the  grandson  of  Augustus,  when 
that  prince  was  about  to  proceed  on  his  expedition  to  the  East,  B.C.  1. 

i  Ad  Att.,  xv.,  19.  2  smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Id.  ib 

*  Appian,  B.  C.,  ii.,  101  ;  Pint.,  COBS.,  55.  *  r>i0  Cass.,  li.,  15 


452  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

It  appears  to  have  contained  a  general  description  of  the  country,  and  an 
that  was  then  known  concerning  its  geography,  natural  productions,  &c. 
It  is  cited  by  Pliny1  as  the  most  trustworthy  account  of  those  regions 
which  was  known  to  him.  4.  A  Roman  History  ('PaytaiVd)  'laro/jia),  cited 
repeatedly  by  Stephanus  Byzantinus.  Numerous  statements  quoted  by 
Plutarch  from  Juba,  without  mentioning  any  particular  work,  but  relating 
to  the  early  history  and  antiquities  of  Rome,  are  evidently  derived  from 
this  treatise.  5.  QearpiKT)  'la-ropta.3  A  general  treatise  on  all  matters 
connected  with  the  stage,  of  which  the  fourth  book  related  to  musical  in 
struments  in  particular.  It  was  a  voluminous  work,  as  the  seventeenth 
book  is  mentioned  by  Photius.  6.  Uepl  ypcupiitris,  or  Iltpl  Cwypctywy,  seems 
to  have  been  a  general  history  of  painting.  He  wrote,  also,  two  botan 
ical  treatises,  and  a  grammatical  work.  The  few  fragments  of  his  his 
torical  works  still  extant  are  collected  in  C.  Muller's  Fragm.  Histor. 
Grcsc.,  vol.  hi.,  p.  465,  seqq. 

V.  DIODORUS  (Ai($8»pos),3  surnamed  SICULUS,  or  the  Sicilian,  was  a  con 
temporary  of  Caesar  and  Augustus.  He  was  born  in  the  town  of  Agyri- 
um,  in  Sicily,  where  he  became  acquainted  with  the  Latin  language, 
through  the  great  intercourse  between  the  Romans  and  Sicilians.  In  or 
der  to  collect  materials  for  his  history,  he  travelled  over  a  great  part  of 
Europe  and  Asia,  and  lived  a  long  time  at  Rome.  He  spent  altogether 
thirty  years  upon  his  work.  It  was  entitled  Bt)8Ato077/c77  la-ropiicfi,  The  His 
torical  Library,  and  was  a  universal  history,  embracing  the  period  from 
the  earliest  mythical  ages  down  to  the  beginning  of  Caesar's  Gallic  wars. 
The  time  at  which  he  wrote  his  history  may  be  determined  pretty  accu 
rately  from  internal  evidence  :  he  not  only  mentions  Caesar's  invasion  of 
Britain,  and  his  crossing  the  Rhine,  but  also  his  death  and  apotheosis ; 
he  farther  states  that  he  was  in  Egypt  in  01.  190.  that  is,  B.C.  20 ;  and 
Scaliger  has  made  it  highly  probable  that  Diodorus  wrote  his  work  after 
the  year  B.C.  8,  when  Augustus  corrected  the  calendar  and  introduced 
the  intercalation  every  fourth  year. 

The  work  of  Diodorus  consisted  of  forty  books.  It  was  divided,  as  he 
himself  informs  us,  into  three  great  sections.  The  first  section,  which 
consisted  of  the  first  six  books,  contained  the  history  of  the  mythical 
times  previous  to  the  Trojan  war.  The  second  section,  which  consisted 
of  eleven  books,  contained  the  history  from  the  Trojan  war  down  to  the 
death  of  Alexander  the  Great.  The  third  section,  which  contained  the 
remaining  twenty-three  books,  treated  of  the  history  from  the  death  of 
Alexander  down  to  the  beginning  of  Caesar's  Gallic  wars.  Of  this  work 
only  the  following  portions  are  extant  entire.  The  first  five  books,  con 
taining  the  early  history  of  the  Eastern  nations,  the  Egyptians,  Ethiopi 
ans,  and  Greeks ;  and  from  book  eleven  to  book  twenty,  containing  the 
history  from  the  second  Persian  war,  B.C.  480,  down  to  B.C.  302.  Of 
the  remaining  portions  there  are  extant  a  number  of  fragments  and  the 
Excerpta,  which  are  preserved  partly  in  Photius,*  and  partly  in  the  Ec- 
loga  made  at  the  command  of  Constantine  Porphyrogenitus. 

i  H.  N.,  vi.,  26,  28,  30  ;  xii.,  31.  2  Athen.,  iv.,  p.  175,D. 

3  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Bibl.  Cod.,  244. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  453 

The  work  of  Diodorus  is  constructed  upon  the  plan  of  annals,  and  the 
events  of  each  year  are  placed  by  the  side  of  one  another  without  any 
internal  connection.  In  composing  his  Bibliotheca,  Diodorus  made  use, 
independent  of  his  own  observations,  of  all  sources  which  were  accessi 
ble  to  him ;  and  had  he  exercised  any  criticism  or  judgment,  or,  rather, 
had  he  possessed  any  critical  powers,  his  work  might  have  been  of  in 
calculable  value  to  the  student  of  history.  But  Diodorus  did  nothing  but 
collect  that  which  he  found  in  his  different  authorities  :  he  thus  jumbled 
together  history,  mythus,  and  fiction  ;  he  frequently  misunderstood  or  mu 
tilated  his  authorities,  and  not  seldom  contradicts  in  one  passage  what  he 
has  stated  in  another.  The  absence  of  criticism  is  manifest  throughout 
the  work,  which  is,  in  fact,  devoid  of  all  the  higher  requisites  of  a  history. 
But,  notwithstanding  all  these  drawbacks,  the  extant  portion  of  this  great 
compilation  is  to  us  of  the  highest  importance,  on  account  of  the  great 
mass  of  materials  which  are  there  collected  from  a  number  of  writers 
whose  works  have  perished.  Diodorus  frequently  mentions  his  author 
ities,  and  in  most  cases  he  has  undoubtedly  preserved  the  substance  of 
his  predecessors.  His  style  is,  on  the  whole,  clear  and  lucid,  but  not  al 
ways  equal,  which  may  be  owing  to  the  different  character  of  the  works 
which  he  used  or  abridged.  His  diction  holds  the  middle  place  between 
the  refined  Attic  and  the  vulgar  Greek  which  was  spoken  in  his  time. 

The  work  of  Diodorus  was  first  published  in  Latin  translations  of  separate  parts,  un 
til  Obsopaeus  published  the  Greek  text  of  books  sixteen  to  twenty,  Basle,  1539,  4to,  which 
was  followed  by  H.  Stephens'  edition  of  books  one  to  five,  and  eleven  to  twenty,  with  the 
excerpta  of  Photius,  Paris,  1559,  fol.  The  next  important  edition  is  that  of  Rhodomannus, 
Hanover,  1604,  fol.,  containing  a  Latin  translation.  The  great  edition  of  Wesseling,  with 
an  extensive  and  very  valuable  commentary,  as  well  as  the  EclogcR  of  Constantine  Por- 
phyrogenitus,  as  far  as  they  were  then  known,  appeared  at  Amsterdam,  1746,  2  vols.  fol 
This  edition  was  reprinted,  with  some  additions,  Bipont  (Deuxponts),  1793,  &c.,  in  11 
vols.  8vo.  An  excellent  edition  was  published  by  L.  Dindorf,  Leipzig,  1828,  6  vols.  8vo 
The  new  fragments  discovered  and  published  by  Mai  were  edited,  with  many  improve 
ments,  in  a  separate  volume,  by  Dindorf,  in  the  same  year.  The  latest  edition  of  Diodorus 
is  that  by  C.  Miiller,  in  Didot's  Bibl.  Graca,with  all  the  fragments  inserted  in  their  proper 
places,  2  vols.  8vo,  Paris,  1842-44.  Some  of  the  editions  contain  sixty-five  Latin  letters 
attributed  to  Diodorus.  They  had  been  first  published  in  Italian,  in  Pietro  Carrera's  Sto- 
ria  di  Catana,  1639,  fol.,  and  were  then  printed  in  a  Latin  version,  by  Preiger,  in  Burmann's 
Thesaurus  Antiq.  Sicil.,  vol.  x.,  and  in  the  old  edition  of  Fabricius,  Bibl.  Gr.,  vol.  xiv.,  p. 
229,  seqq.  The  Greek  original  of  these  letters  has,  however,  never  been  seen  by  any  one, 
and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  they  are  a  forgery,  made  after  the  revival  of  letters. 

VI.  DIONYSIUS  (Aiovvo-ios) 1  of  Halicarnassus,  a  celebrated  writer,  not 
only  in  rhetoric  and  criticism,  but  also  in  history.  He  was  born,  accord 
ing  to  the  calculations  of  Dodwell,  between  B.C.  78  and  54.  Strabo2  calls 
him  his  own  contemporary.  His  death  took  place  soon  after  B.C.  7,  the 
year  in  which  he  completed  and  published  his  great  work  on  the  history 
of  Rome.  Respecting  his  parents  and  education  we  know  nothing,  nor 
any  thing  about  his  position  in  his  native  place  before  he  emigrated  to 
Rome,  though  some  have  inferred,  from  his  work  on  rhetoric,  that  he  en 
joyed  a  great  reputation  at  Halicarnassus.  All  that  we  know  for  certain  is 
the  information  which  he  himself  gives  us  in  the  introduction  to  his  history 
of  Rome  (i.,  7),  and  a  few  more  particulars  which  we  may  glean  from  his 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Strab.,  xiv.,  p.  656. 


454  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

other  works.  According  to  his  own  account,  he  went  to  Italy  immediate 
ly  after  the  termination  of  the  civil  wars,  about  B.C.  29.  Henceforth  he 
remained  at  Rome,  and  the  twenty-two  years  which  followed  his  arrival 
at  that  capital  were  mainly  spent  by  him  in  making  himself  acquainted 
with  the  Latin  language  and  literature,  and  in  collecting  materials  for  his 
great  work  on  Roman  history.  We  may  assume  that,  like  other  rhetori 
cians  of  the  time,  he  had  commenced  his  career  as  a  teacher  of  rhetoric 
at  Halicarnassus,  and  his  works  bear  strong  evidence  of  his  having  been 
similarly  occupied  at  Rome.  There  he  lived  on  terms  of  friendship  with 
many  distinguished  men,  such  as  Q.  JElius  Tubero,  and  the  rhetorician 
Caecilius  ;  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  he  may  have  received  the  Roman 
franchise,  but  his  Roman  name  is  not  mentioned  any  where. 

All  the  works  of  Dionysius,  some  of  which  are  completely  lost,  must  be 
divided  into  two  classes.  The  first  contains  his  rhetorical  and  critical 
treatises,  all  of  which  probably  belong  to  an  earlier  period  of  his  life  (per 
haps  to  the  first  years  of  his  residence  at  Rome),  than  his  historical  works, 
which  constitute  the  second  class.  We  will  consider  merely  his  historical 
works  at  the  present  time,  reserving  an  account  of  his  other  productions 
for  the  head  of  Rhetoricians  and  Sophists. 

Historical  Works  of  Dionysius. — In  this  class  of  compositions,  to  which 
Dionysius  appears  to  have  devoted  his  later  years,  he  was  less  successful 
than  in  his  critical  and  rhetorical  essays,  inasmuch  as  we  every  where 
find  the  rhetorician  gaining  the  ascendency  over  the  historian.  The  fol 
lowing  historical  works  of  his  are  known  :  1.  Xp6voi  or  Xpow/ca.  This 
work,  which  is  lost,  probably  contained  chronological  investigations, 
though  not  concerning  Roman  history.  2.  'Pca/j-aiKTi  'Apxaio\oyia,  which 
Photius1  styles  'IffropiKol  \6yoi.  This  is  the  great  historical  work  of 
Dionysius.  It  consisted  of  twenty  books,  and  contained  the  history  of 
Rome  from  the  earliest  or  mythical  times  down  to  the  year  B.C.  264,  in 
which  the  history  of  Polybius  begins  with  the  Punic  wars.  The  first  nine 
books  alone  are  complete ;  of  the  tenth  and  eleventh  we  have  the  great 
er  part;  and  of  the  remaining  nine  we  possess  nothing  but  fragments 
and  extracts,  which  were  contained  in  the  collections  made  at  the  com 
mand  of  the  Emperor  Constant  ine  Porphyrogenitus,  and  were  first  pub 
lished  by  Mai,  from  a  MS.  in  the  library  at  Milan  (1816,  4to),  and  reprint 
ed  at  Frankfort,  1817,  8vo. 

Dionysius  treated  the  early  history  of  Rome  with  great  minuteness. 
The  eleven  books  extant  do  not  carry  the  history  beyond  B.C.  441,  so 
that  the  eleventh  book  breaks  off  very  soon  after  the  decemviral  legisla 
tion.  This  peculiar  minuteness  in  the  early  history,  however,  was,  in  a 
great  measure,  the  consequence  of  the  object  he  had  proposed  to  himself, 
and  which,  as  he  himself  states,  was  to  remove  the  erroneous  notions 
which  the  Greeks  entertained  with  regard  to  Rome's  greatness.  Diony 
sius  had  no  clear  notions  of  the  early  constitution  of  Rome,  and  was  led 
astray  by  the  nature  of  the  institutions  which  he  saw  in  his  own  day  ;  and 
he  thus  makes  innumerable  mistakes  in  treating  of  the  history  of  the  con 
stitution.  He  introduces  numerous  speeches  in  his  work,  which,  though 
i  Phot.,  Bibl.  Cod.,  Ixxxiv. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  455 

written  with  artistic  skill,  nevertheless  show  that  Dionysius  was  a  rhet 
orician,  not  an  historian,  and  still  less  a  statesman.  Still,  however,  his 
work  is  one  of  the  greatest  importance  to  the  student  of  Roman  history, 
since  he  discusses  carefully  every  thing  relating  to  the  religion,  laws,  and 
private  life  of  the  Romans.  His  style  is  very  good,  and,  with  a  few  ex 
ceptions,  his  language  may  be  called  perfectly  pure.1 

The  first  complete  edition  of  the  'Apx<xioA.o-yi'a.  and  the  rhetorical  works  together  is 
that  of  Sylburg,  Frankfort,  1586,  2  vols.  fol.,  reprinted  at  Leipzig,  1691,  2  vols.  fol.  An 
other  reprint,  with  the  introduction  of  a  few  alterations,  was  edited  by  Hudson,  Oxford, 
1704,  2  vols.  fol.,  which,  however,  is  a  very  inferior  performance.  A  new  and  much  im 
proved  edition,  though  with  many  bad  and  arbitrary  emendations,  was  published  by 
Reiske,  Leipzig,  1774,  seqq.,  in  6  vols.  8vo,  the  last  of  which  was  edited  by  Morus. 

VII.  NICOLAUS  DAMASCKNUS  (Nt/c^Aaos  Aa^a<r/c7}^),2  a  celebrated  Greek 
polyhistor,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Herod  the  Great  and  the  Emperor 
Augustus,  with  both  of  whom  he  was  connected  by  intimate  friendship. 
He  was,  as  his  name  indicates,  a  native  of  Damascus,  and  his  parents 
were  distinguished  no  less  for  their  personal  character  than  for  their 
wealth,  his  father  Antipater  having  been  a  highly  esteemed  orator,  and 
not  only  invested  with  the  highest  magistracies  in  his  native  place,  but 
also  employed  on  several  embassies.  Nicolaus  showed  great  talents, 
even  before  he  attained  the  age  of  puberty,  and  gained  at  this  time  the 
reputation  of  being  the  most  accomplished  among  the  youths  of  his  age. 
At  that  early  age,  he  composed  tragedies  and  comedies,  which  met  with 
general  applause.  But  he  soon  abandoned  these  poetical  pursuits,  and 
devoted  himself  to  rhetoric,  music,  mathematics,  and  the  philosophy  of 
Aristotle.  Herod  carried  on  his  philosophical  studies  in  common  with 
Nicolaus,  and  the  amicable  relation  between  the  two  men  was  strength 
ened  by  these  common  pursuits.  In  a  conversation  with  Herod,  Nicolaus 
once  directed  his  attention  to  the  advantages  which  a  prince  might  derive 
from  history,  and  the  king,  who  was  struck  by  the  truth  of  the  observa 
tion,  entreated  Nicolaus  to  write  a  history.  The  latter  complied  with  the 
request,  and  compiled  a  most  voluminous  work  on  ancient  history.  In 
B.C.  13,  when  Herod  went  to  Rome  to  pay  Augustus  a  visit,  he  took 
Nicolaus  with  him.  On  this  occasion,  Nicolaus  made  Augustus  a  present 
of  the  finest  fruit  of  the  palm-tree,  which  Augustus  henceforth  called 
Nicolai,  a  name  by  which  that  fruit  was  known  down  to  the  Middle  Ages. 
Nicolaus  rose  so  high  in  the  favor  of  Augustus,  that  he  was,  on  more  than 
one  occasion,  of  great  service  to  Herod  when  the  emperor  was  incensed 
against  the  latter.  On  the  death  of  Herod,  Archelaus  succeeded  to  the 
throne,  chiefly  through  the  exertions  of  Nicolaus.  We  have  no  account 
of  what  became  of  Nicolaus  after  this  event,  and  how  long  he  survived  it. 

Nicolaus  wrote  a  large  number  of  works,  of  which  the  most  important 
were,  1.  A  Life  of  Himself,  of  which  a  considerable  portion  is  still  extant. 
2.  A  Universal  History,  already  referred  to,  consisting  of  one  hundred  and 
forty-four  books,  of  which  we  have  only  a  few  fragments.  As  far  as  we 
can  judge  from  these  remains,  it  treated  chiefly  of  the  history  of  the  Asi 
atic  nations.  It  appears,  however,  to  have  been  a  hurried  compilation, 
in  which  Nicolaus,  without  exercising  any  criticism,  incorporated  what- 
1  Smith,  I.  c,  2  stahr;  Smitti,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


456  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ever  he  found  written  by  earlier  historians.  3.  A  Life  of  Augustus,  from 
which  we  have  some  extracts,  made  by  command  of  Constantine  Porphy- 
rogenitus.  These  excerpta  show  that  the  author  was  not  much  concerned 
about  accuracy,  and  that  the  biography  was  more  of  a  eulogy  than  a  his 
tory.  4.  A  Life  of  Herod.  5.  'HOw  TrapaS6£cov  (rwayGryf),  that  is,  a  collec 
tion  of  singular  customs  among  the  various  nations.of  the  earth.  Stobseus 
has  preserved  many  passages  from  it.  He  also  wrote  commentaries  on 
x\ristotle  and  other  philosophical  works,  and  was  the  author  of  several 
tragedies  and  comedies.  Stobaeus  has  preserved  a  fragment  of  one  of  his 
comedies,  extending  to  forty-four  lines. 

The  best  and  most  complete  edition  of  the  fragments  of  Nicolaus,  before  that  of  Miil- 
ler,  with  Latin  translations  by  Valesius  and  Grotius,  is  that  of  Orelli,  Leipzig,  1804,  8vo. 
It  contains,  also,  a  good  dissertation  on  the  life  and  writings  of  the  author,  by  the  Abbe 
Sevin,  which  originally  appeared  in  th£  Mernoires  de  VAcad.  des  Inscript.,  &c.,  vol.  vi.,  p. 
486,  seqq.  In  1811,  Orelli  published  a  supplement  to  his  edition,  which  contains  notes  and 
emendations  by  Coraes,  Creuzer,  Schweighaeuser,  and  others.  "*  The  most  complete  col 
lection  of  the  remains  is  that  of  C.  Miiller,  in  his  Fragmenta  Historicorum  Grcecorum,  in 
Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grazca,  vol.  iii.,  p.  343,  seqq. 

VIII.  MEMNON  (Me^j/oji/),1  a  native  probably  of  Heraclea  Pontica.     He 
wrote  a  large  work  on  the  history  of  that  city,  especially  of  the  tyrants 
under  whose  power  Heraclea  had  at  various  times  fallen.    Our  knowledge 
of  this  work  is  derived  from  Photius.     Of  how  many  books  it  consisted 
we  do  not  know.     Photius  had  read  from  the  ninth  to  the  sixteenth  in 
clusive,  of  which  portion  he  has  made  a  tolerably  copious  abstract.    The 
first  eight  books  he  had  not  read,  and  he  speaks  of  other  books  after  the 
sixteenth.     The  ninth  book  begins  with  an  account  of  the  tyrant  Clear- 
chus,  the  disciple  of  Plato  and  Isocrates.     The  last  event  mentioned  in 
the  sixteenth  book  was  the  death  of  Brithagoras,  who  was  sent  by  the 
Heracleans  as  ambassador  to  Julius  Caesar,  after  the  latter  had  obtained 
the  supreme  power.    From  this  Vossius  supposes  that  the  work  was  writ 
ten  about  the  time  of  Augustus  ;  in  the  judgment  of  Orelli,  not  later  than 
the  time  of  Hadrian  or  the  Antonines.     It  is,  of  course,  impossible  to  fix 
the  date  with  any  precision,  as  we  do  not  know  at  all  down  to  what  time 
the  entire  work  was  carried.     The  style  of  Memnon,  according  to  Pho 
tius,  was  clear  and  simple,  and  the  words  were  well  chosen.     The  ex 
cerpta  of  Photius,  however,  contain  numerous  examples  of  rare  and  poetic 
al  expressions,  as  well  as  a  few  which  indicate  the  decline  of  the  Greek 
language.     These  excerpta  were  first  published  separately,  together  with 
the  remains  of  Ctesias  and  Agatharchides,  by  H.  Stephens,  Paris,  1557. 
The  best  edition  now  is  that  of  Orelli,  Leipzig,  1816,  8vo,  containing,  to 
gether  with  the  remains  of  Memnon,  a  few  fragments  of  other  writers  on 
Heraclea.     They  are  also  given  by  C.  Miiller,  in  his  Fragm.  Hist.  Gr<zc., 
vol.  iii.,  p.  525,  seqq. 

IX.  PAMPHILA  (ITa^iXTj),2  a  female  historian  of  considerable  reputation, 
who  lived  in  the  reign  of  Nero.     According  to  Suidas,  she  was  an  Epi- 
daurian ;  but  Photius  describes  her  as  an  Egyptian,  by  birth  or  descent. 
These  two  statements,  however,  may  be  reconciled  by  supposing  that  she 
was  a  native  of  Epidaurus,  and  that  her  family  came  from  Egypt.     She 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  457 

related  in  the  preface  to  her  work,  for  an  account  of  which  we  are  in 
debted  to  Photius,  that,  during  the  thirteen  years  she  had  lived  with  her 
husband,  from  whom  she  was  never  absent  for  a  single  hour,  she  was 
constantly  at  work  upon  her  book,  and  that  she  diligently  wrote  down 
whatever  she  heard  from  her  husband,  and  from  the  many  other  learned 
men  who  frequented  their  house,  as  well  as  whatever  she  herself  read  in 
books.  Hence  wre  can  account  for  the  statement  of  Suidas,  that  some 
authorities  ascribed  her  work  to  her  husband.  The  principal  work  of 
Pamphila  is  cited  by  various  names,  but  its  full  and  correct  title  seems  to 
have  been  the  one  preserved  by  Photius,  namely,  trvfifiiKruv  'KTTOOIKWV 
inro^rmaTuv  \6yoi.  This  title  gives  a  general  idea  of  the  nature  of  its 
contents,  wiiich  are  still  farther  characterized  by  Photius.  The  work  was 
not  arranged  according  to  subjects,  or  according  to  any  settled  plan,  but 
it  was  more  like  a  commonplace  book,  in  which  each  piece  of  information 
was  set  down  as  it  fell  under  the  notice  of  the  writer,  who  stated  that  she 
believed  this  variety  would  give  greater  pleasure  to  the  reader.  Photius 
considered  the  work  as  one  of  great  use,  and  supplying  important  informa 
tion  on  many  points  of  history  and  literature.  The  estimation  in  which 
it  was  held  in  antiquity  is  shown,  not  only  by  the  judgment  of  Photius, 
but  also  by  the  references  to  it  in  the  works  of  Aulus  Gellius  and  Diogenes 
Laertius,  who  appear  to  have  availed  themselves  of  it  to  a  considerable 
extent.  Modern  scholars  are  best  acquainted  with  the  name  of  Pamphila, 
from  a  statement  in  her  work,  preserved  by  Aulus  Gellius,1  by  which  is 
ascertained  the  birth-year  of  Hellanicus,  Herodotus,  and  Thucydides  re 
spectively,  though  this  account,  which  is  received  by  most  scholars,  is,  as 
we  have  already  seen,  rejected  by  Kruger,  in  his  life  of  Thucydides,  on 
account  of  the  little  confidence  which,  according  to  him,  can  be  placed  in 
Pamphila's  authority. 

The  history  of  Pamphila  was  divided  into  many  books.  Photius  speaks 
of  only  eight,  but  Suidas  says  that  it  consisted  of  thirty-three.  The  lat 
ter  must  be  correct,  since  we  find  Aulus  Gellius3  quoting  the  eleventh 
and  twenty-ninth,  and  Diogenes  Laertius3  the  twenty-fifth  and  thirty- 
second.  Perhaps  no  more  than  eight  books  were  extant  in  the  time  of 
Photius.  Besides  the  historical  work  just  mentioned,  Pamphila  wrote 
several  other  works,  the  titles  of  which  are  given  by  Suidas.  1.  An  Epit 
ome  of  Ctesias,  in  three  books.  2.  Epitomes  of  histories  and  of  other 
works,  eTUTo/j.al  Iffropiuv  re  KOL  erepui/  $i$\l<av.  3.  Hepl  o^u<£jcrj87jT7jcrewp.  4. 
Tlepl  atppoSiffiuv. 

The  fragments  of  the  works  of  Pamphila  are  collected  by  Miiller,  in  his  Fragmenta 
Hist.  Grcec.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  520,  seqq. 

X.  JOSEPHUS,  FLAVIUS  (Q\d&ios  'LOTTOS),*  the  celebrated  Jewish  histo 
rian,  son  of  Matthias,  is  well  known  not  only  as  a  writer,  but  also  as  a 
warrior  and  statesman.  He  is  himself  our  main  authority  for  the  events 
of  his  life,  a  circumstance  obviously  not  without  its  drawbacks,  espe 
cially  as  he  is  by  no  means  averse  to  self-laudation.  He  was  born  at 
Jerusalem,  in  A.D.  37,  the  first  year  of  Caligula's  reign,  and  the  fourth 


i  Aul.  GelL,  xv.,  23. 

3  Diog.  Laert.,  iii.,  23;  v.,  36.  *  Elder;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  t.  y. 


458  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

after  our  Lord's  ascension.  On  his  mother's  side  he  was  descended 
from  the  Asmonean  princes,  while  from  his  father  he  inherited  the  priest 
ly  office.  He  enjoyed  an  excellent  education,  and  at  the  age  of  twenty- 
six  went  to  Rome  to  plead  the  cause  of  some  Jewish  priests,  whom  Felix, 
the  procurator  of  Judaea,  had  sent  thither  as  prisoners.  After  a  narrow 
escape  from  death  by  shipwreck,  he  safely  landed  at  Puteoli ;  and,  being 
introduced  to  Poppaea,  he  not  only  effected  the  release  of  his  friends,  but 
received  great  presents  from  the  empress.1  On  his  return  to  Jerusalem 
he  found  his  countrymen  eagerly  bent  on  a  revolt  from  Rome,  from  which 
he  used  his  best  endeavors  to  dissuade  them,  but,  failing  in  this,  he  pro 
fessed  to  enter  into  the  popular  designs.  He  was  chosen  one  of  the  gen 
erals  of  the  Jews,  and  was  sent  to  manage  affairs  in  Galilee.2  When 
Vespasian  and  his  army  entered  Galilee,  Josephus  threw  himself  into 
Jotapata,  which  he  defended  for  forty-seven  days.  When  the  place  was 
taken,  the  life  of  Josephus  was  spared  by  Vespasian,  through  the  inter 
cession  of  Titus.  Josephus  thereupon  assumed  the  character  of  a  proph 
et,  and  predicted  that  the  empire  should  one  day  be  his  and  his  son's.3 
Vespasian  treated  him  with  respect,  but  did  not  release  him  from  captivity 
till  he  was  proclaimed  emperor,4  nearly  three  years  afterward  (A.D.  70). 
Josephus  was  present  with  Titus  at  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  afterward 
accompanied  him  to  Rome.  He  received  the  freedom  of  the  city  from 
Vespasian,  who  assigned  him  as  a  residence  a  house  formerly  occupier!  by 
himself,  and  treated  him  honorably  to  the  end  of  his  reign.  The  same  fa 
vor  was  extended  to  him  by  Titus  and  Domitian.  He  assumed  the  name 
of  Flavius  as  a  dependent  of  the  Flavian  family.  His  time  at  Rome  ap 
pears  to  have  been  employed  mainly  in  the  composition  of  his  works. 

The  date  of  his  death  can  not  be  fixed  with  accuracy,  but  we  know5 
that  he  survived  Agrippa  II.,  who  died  in  A.D.  97,  so  that  his  own  decease 
may  probably  have  taken  place  about  A.D.  100.  His  first  wife,  whom  he 
took  at  Vespasian's  desire,  was  a  captive ;  his  marriage  with  her,  there 
fore,  since  he  was  a  priest,  was  contrary  to  the  Jewish  law,  according  to 
his  own  statement  ;6  and  his  language7  may  imply  that,  when  he  was  re 
leased  from  his  bonds,  and  had  accompanied  Vespasian  to  Alexandrea, 
he  divorced  her.  At  Alexandrea  he  took  a  second  wife,  whom  he  also 
divorced,  from  dislike  to  her  character,  after  she  had  borne  him  three 
sons,  one  of  whom,  Hyrcanus,  was  still  alive  when  he  wrote  his  life. 
His  third  wife  was  a  Jewess  of  Cyprus,  of  noble  family,  by  whom  he  had 
two  sons,  Justus  and  Simonides,  surnamed  Agrippa.8 

With  respect  to  the  character  of  Josephus,  we  have  already  noticed 
his  tendency  to  self-laudation,  so  that  he  himself  is  by  no  means  free 
from  the  vanity  which  he  charges  upon  Apion.  Again,  to  say  nothing  of 
the  court  he  paid  to  the  notorious  Agrippa  II.,  his  profane  flattery  of  the 
Flavian  family,  "  so  gross  (to  use  the  words  of  Fuller)  that  it  seems  not 
limned  with  a  pencil,  but  daubed  with  a  trowel,"9  is  another  obvious  and 


i  Vit.,  3.  2  Ibid.,  4,  seqq. ;  Bell.  Jud..,  ii., 

3  Vit.,  74,  seqq. ;  Bell.  Jud.,  Hi.,  7,  seq. ;  vi.,  5,  &c.  *  Bell.  Jud.,  iv.,  10. 

*  Vit.,  65.  e  Ant^  in.,  12,  t)  2.  7  vit.,  75.  8  ibid.,  76. 

9  Compare  Wordsworth's  Discourses  on  Public  Education,  Disc.  xx. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  459 

repulsive  feature  in  the  character  of  Josephus.  His  early  visit  to  Rome, 
and  introduction  to  the  sweets  of  court  favor,  must  have  brought  more 
home  to  him  the  lesson  he  might  have  learned,  at  all  events,  from  the 
example  of  Herod  the  Great  and  others — that  adherence  to  the  Roman 
cause  was  the  path  to  worldly  distinction.  And  the  awe  with  which  the 
greatness  and  power  of  Rome  inspired  him  lay  always  like  a  spell  upon 
his  mind,  and  stifled  his  patriotism.  He  felt  pride,  indeed,  in  the  antiqui 
ty  of  his  nation  and  in  its  ancient  glories,  as  is  clear  from  what  are  com 
monly  called  his  books  against  Apion ;  neither  do  we  find  in  him  any 
want  of  sympathy  with  his  country's  misfortunes.  But  the  fault  of  Jose 
phus  was  that  (as  patriots  never  do)  he  despaired  of  his  country.  Again, 
holding,  in  the  main,  the  abstract  doctrines  of  a  pharisee,  but  with  the 
principles  and  temper  of  an  Herodian,  he  strove  to  accommodate  his  re 
ligion  to  heathen  tastes  and  prejudices,  and  this  by  actual  omissions,  no 
less  than  by  a  rationalistic  system  of  modification.  Thus  he  speaks  of 
Moses  and  his  law  in  a  tone  which  might  be  adopted  by  any  disbeliever 
in  his  divine  legation.  He  says  that  Abraham  went  into  Egypt,  intend 
ing  to  adopt  the  Egyptian  views  of  religion,  should  he  find  them  better 
than  his  own.  He  intimates  a  doubt  of  there  having  been  any  miracle  in 
the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea.  Numerous  other  instances  of  a  similar  na 
ture  our  limits  forbid  us  to  specify. 

The  celebrated  passage  in  which  mention  is  made  by  him  of  the  found 
er  of  our  religion  is  now  generally  regarded  as  an  interpolation.1 

The  writings  of  Josephus  have  always  been  regarded,  and  with  justice, 
as  indispensable  for  the  theological  student.  For  the  determination  of 
various  readings,  both  in  the  Hebrew  text  of  the  Old  Testament  and  in 
the  Septuagint  version,  they  are  by  no  means  without  their  value.  But 
their  chief  use  consists  in  such  points  as  their  testimony  to  the  striking 
fulfillment  of  our  Savior's  prophecies,  their  confirmation  of  the  canon, 
facts,  and  statements  of  Scripture,  and  the  obvious  collateral  aid  which 
they  supply  for  its  elucidation.  The  character  of  a  faithful  historian  is 
claimed  by  Josephus  for  himself,  and  has  been  pretty  generally  acknowl 
edged,  though,  from  what  has  been  said  of  his  anxiety  to  conciliate  his 
heathen  readers,  it  can  not  be  admitted  without  some  drawbacks.  The 
language  of  Josephus  is  remarkably  pure,  though  we  meet  occasionally 
with  unclassical,  or,  at  least,  unusual  expressions  and  constructions,  in 
some  of  which  instances,  however,  the  readings  are  doubtful.  The  speech 
es  which  he  introduces  have  much  spirit  and  vigor  ;  and  there  is  a  graph 
ic  liveliness  in  his  descriptions  which  carries  our  feelings  along  with  it, 
and  fully  justifies  the  title  of  the  Greek  Livy  applied  to  him  by  St.  Jerome.8 

The  works  of  Josephus  are  as  follows:  1.  The  History  of  the  Jewish 
War  (Ilepi  TOV  'lot/Sai'/coD  TTO\C/J.OV  $)  'louSai'/CTjs  IffTopias  irfpl  aAw<reas),  in  seven 
books.  Josephus  tells  us  that  he  wrote  it  first  in  his  own  language,  and 
then  translated  it  into  Greek,  for  the  information  of  European  readers.3 
The  Hebrew  copy  is  no  longer  extant.  The  Greek  was  published  about 
A.D.  75,  under  the  patronage  and  with  the  especial  recommendation  of 

1  Elder,  1.  c.  2  Hieron,  ad  Eustoch.,  De  Oust.  Virg.  Ep.,  xviii. 

3  Prooe m.  ad  Bell.  Jud.,  I. 


460  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Titus.  It  was  admitted  into  the  Palatine  library,  and  its  author  was 
honored  with  a  statue  at  Rome.  It  commences  with  the  capture  of  Je 
rusalem  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  in  B.C.  170,  runs  rapidly  over  the 
events  before  Josephus's  own  time,  and  then  gives  a  detailed  account  of 
the  fatal  war  with  Rome.  2.  The  Jewish  Antiquities  ('louSai'/c)/  'Ap^aioAo- 
yta),  in  twenty  books,  completed  about  A.D.  93.  The  work  extends  from 
the  creation  of  the  world  to  A.D.  66,  the  twelfth  year  of  Nero,  in  which 
the  Jews  were  goaded  to  rebellion  by  Gessius  Florus.  3.  His  own  life,  in 
one  book.  This  is  an  appendage  to  the  Antiquities.  4.  A  treatise  on 
the  antiquity  of  the  Jews,  or  Kara  'AinWos,  in  two  books.  It  is  in  an 
swer  to  such  as  impugned  the  antiquity  of  the  Jewish  nation  on  the  ground 
of  the  silence  of  Greek  writers  respecting  it.  The  title  "Against  Apion" 
is  rather  a  misnomer,  and  is  applicable  only  to  a  portion  of  the  second 
book  (§  1-13).  This  treatise  exhibits  considerable  learning.  5.  Els  Ma/c- 
Kafiaiovs,  1)  irepl  avroKparopos  \oyi<r/j.ov.  Probably  spurious,  though  refer 
red  to  as  a  work  of  Josephus  by  Eusebius,  St.  Jerome,  Philostorgius,  and 
others.  It  is  an  extremely  declamatory  account  of  the  martyrdom  of 
Eleazar  (an  aged  priest),  and  of  seven  youths  and  their  mother,  in  the 
persecution  under  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Its  title  has  reference  to  the 
zeal  for  God's  law  displayed  by  the  sufferers  in  the  spirit  of  the  Macca 
bees.1 

The  invaluable  but  posthumous  edition  of  Josephus,  by  Hudson,  containing  all  the 
works,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  came  out  at  Oxford  in  1720,  2  vols.  fol.  The  Latin  version 
was  new ;  the  text  was  founded  on  a  most  careful  and  extensive  collation  of  MSS.,  and 
the  edition  was  farther  enriched  by  notes  and  indices.  Havercamp's  edition,  Amster 
dam,  1726,  2  vols.  fol.,  is  more  convenient  for  the  reader  than  creditable  to  the  editor. 
That  of  Oberthlir,  in  3  vols.  8vo,  Leipzig,  1782-1785,  contains  only  the  Greek  text,  most 
carefully  edited,  and  the  edition  remains,  unfortunately,  incomplete.  Another  was  ed 
ited  by  Richter,  Leipzig,  1826,  as  part  of  a  Bibliotheca  Patrum.  The  latest  edition,  with 
probably  the  best  text,  is  that  of  Dindorf,  2  vols.  large  8vo  thus  far,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca 
Graeca,  Paris,  1845-7.  It  contains,  also,  the  fragments  relative  to  Jewish  history  con 
tained  in  Photius,  and  fragments  by  C.  Miiller,  hitherto  unedited,  of  Polybius,  Dionysius 
of  Halicarnassus,  Polyaenus,  Dexippus,  and  Eusebius. 

XL  PLUTARCHUS  (n\oi>Tapx<>s)S  the  biographer  and  philosopher,  was 
born  at  Chaeronea,  in  Bceotia.  The  year  of  his  birth  is  not  known,  but 
we  learn  from  Plutarch  himself  that  he  was  studying  philosophy  under 
Ammonius  at  the  time  when  Nero  was  making  his  progress  through 
Greece,  in  A.D.  66,  from  which  we  may  assume  that  he  was  a  youth  or 
a  young  man  at  the  time.  He  spent  some  time  at  Rome,  and  in  other 
parts  of  Italy  ;3  but  he  tells  us  that  he  did  not  learn  the  Latin  language 
in  Italy,  because  he  was  occupied  with  public  commissions,  and  in  giving 
lectures  on  philosophy,  and  it  was  late  in  life  before  he  busied  himself 
with  Roman  literature.  He  was  lecturing  at  Rome  during  the  reign  of 
Domitian ;  but  the  statement  of  Suidas,  that  Plutarch  was  the  preceptor 
of  Trajan,  ought  to  be  rejected.  Plutarch  spent  the  later  years  of  his  life 
at  Chaeronea,  where  he  discharged  various  magisterial  offices,  and  held  a 
priesthood.  The  time  of  his  death  is  unknown.  The  work  which  has 
immortalized  Plutarch's  name  is  his  Parallel  Lives  (Bioi  napd\\-n\oi)  of 
forty  six  Greeks  and  Romans.  The  forty-six  lives  are  arranged  in  pairs; 

»  Elder,  1.  c.  *  Long;  Smith,  Diet,  Siogr.,  ».  v.  s  Vit.  Demesth.,  3 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  461 

each  pair  contains  the  life  of  a  Greek  and  a  Roman,  and  is  followed  by  a 
comparison,  avyKpiffis,  of  the  two  men :  in  a  few  pairs  the  comparison  is 
omitted  or  lost.  He  seems  to  have  considered  each  pair  of  lives  and  the 
parallel  as  making  one  book  ($i$\iov).  When  he  says  that  the  book  of 
the  lives  of  Demosthenes  and  Cicero  was  the  fifth,  it  is  the  most  natural 
interpretation  to  suppose  that  it  was  the  fifth  in  the  order  in  which  he 
wrote  them.  It  could  not  be  the  fifth  in  any  other  sense,  if  each  pair 
composed  a  book.  We  have  also  the  lives  of  Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  Ara- 
tus,  Galba,  and  Otho,  which  are  placed  in  the  editions  after  the  forty-six 
lives.  A  life  of  Homer  is  also  attributed  to  him,  but  it  is  not  printed  in 
all  the  editions.  The  following  lives  by  Plutarch  are  lost :  Epaminon- 
das,  Scipio,  Augustus,  Tiberius,  Caligula,  Claudius,  Nero,  Vitellius,  He- 
siod,  Pindar,  Crates  the  Cynic,  Daiphantus,  Aristomenes,  and  the  poet 
Aratus. 

The  authorities  for  Plutarch's  Lives  are  incidentally  indicated  in  the 
lives  themselves.  He  is  said  to  quote  250  writers,  of  whom  about  eighty 
are  those  whose  works  are  either  entirely  or  partially  lost.  The  ques 
tion  of  the  sources  of  Plutarch's  Lives  has  been  examined  by  Heeren.1 
Plutarch  must  have  had  access  to  a  good  library,  and  if  he  wrote  all  his 
Lives  during  his  old  age  at  Chaeronea,  we  must  infer  that  he  had  a  large 
stock  of  books  at  command.  Being  a  Greek,  and  an  educated  man,  he 
could  not  fail  to  be  well  acquainted  with  all  the  sources  for  his  Greek 
Lives ;  and  he  has  indicated  them  pretty  fully.  His  acquaintance  with 
the  sources  for  his  Roman  Lives  was  less  complete,  and  his  handling  of 
them  less  critical.  Perhaps  no  work  of  antiquity  has  been  so  extensively 
read  in  modern  times  as  Plutarch's  Lives.  The  reason  of  their  popular 
ity  is  that  Plutarch  has  rightly  conceived  the  business  of  a  biographer : 
his  biography  is  true  portraiture.  Other  biography  is  often  a  dull,  tedious 
enumeration  of  facts  in  the  order  of  time,  with  perhaps  a  summing  up 
of  character  at  the  end.  The  reflections  of  Plutarch  are  neither  imperti 
nent  nor  trifling  ;  his  sound  good  sense  is  always  there  ;  his  honesty  of 
purpose  is  transparent ;  his  love  of  humanity  warms  the  whole.  His 
work  is  and  will  remain,  in  spite  of  all  the  fault  that  can  be  found  with 
it  by  plodding  collectors  of  facts  and  small  critics,  the  book  of  those  who 
can  nobly  think,  and  dare  and  do. 

Plutarch's  other  writings,  above  sixty  in  number,  are  placed  under  the 
general  title  of  Moralia,  or  ethical  works,  though  some  of  them  are  of  an 
historical  and  anecdotical  character,  such  as  the  essay  on  the  malignity 
(/ccucoirjfleta)  of  Herodotus,  which  neither  requires  nor  merits  refutation, 
and  his  Apophihcgmata,  many  of  which  are  of  little  value.  Eleven  of 
these  essays  are  generally  classed  among  Plutarch's  historical  works. 
Among  them,  also,  are  his  Roman  Questions  or  Inquiries,  his  Greek 
Questions,  and  his  Lives  of  the  Ten  Orators.  But  it  is  likely  enough  that 
several  of  the  essays  which  are  included  in  the  Moralia  of  Plutarch  are 
not  by  him.  At  any  rate,  some  of  them  are  not  worth  reading.  The 
best  of  the  essays  included  among  the  Moralia  are  of  a  different  stamp. 
There  is  no  philosophical  system  in  these  essays :  pure  speculation  was 
1  De  Fontibus,  dec.,  Vit.  Parallel.,  &c.,  Gottingen,  1820,  8vo. 


462  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

not  Plutarch's  province.  His  best  writings  are  practical,  and  their  mer 
its  consist  in  the  soundness  of  his  views  on  the  ordinary  events  of  human 
life,  and  in  the  benevolence  of  his  temper.  His  "  Marriage  Precepts" 
are  a  sample  of  his  good  sense  and  of  his  happiest  expression.  He  right 
ly  appreciated,  also,  the  importance  of  a  good  education,  and  he  gives 
much  sound  advice  on  the  bringing  up  of  children. 

The  first  edition  of  all  the  works  of  Plutarch  is  that  of  H.  Stephens,  Geneva,  1572,  13 
vols.  8vo.  An  edition  of  the  Greek  text,  with  a  Latin  version,  appeared  at  Leipzig,  1774- 
1782,  12  vols.  8vo,  and  it  is  generally  called  Reiske's  edition,  but  Reiske  died  in  1774. 
Hutten's  edition  appeared  at  Tubingen,  1791-1805,  14  vols.  8vo.  A  separate  edition  of 
the  Lives  first  appeared  in  Latin,  at  Rome,  about  1470,  2  vols.  fol.  The  version  was 
made  by  several  hands,  and  was  the  foundation  of  the  Spanish  and  Italian  versions. 
The  first  edition  of  the  Greek  text  of  the  Lives  was  that  printed  by  Giunta,  Florence, 
1517,  fol.  The  edition  of  Bryan,  London,  1729,  5  vols.  4to,  with  a  Latin  version,  was 
completed  by  Moses  du  Soul,  after  Bryan's  death.  There  is  an  edition  by  Coraes,  Paris, 
1809-1815,  with  notes,  in  6  vols.  8vo  ;  one  by  Schaefer,  Leipzig,  1825-30,  6  vols.  8vo,  with 
notes  original  and  selected  ;  one  by  Sintenis,  Leipzig,  1839-1846,  4  vols.  8vo  ;  and  one  by 
Doehner,  2  vols.  large  8vo,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graca,  Paris,  1846.  The  best  of  these 
editions  is  that  of  Sintenis.  The  first  edition  of  the  Moralia,  which  is  said  to  be  very  in 
correct,  was  printed  by  the  elder  Aldus,  Venice,  1509,  fol.  ;  and  afterward  at  Basle,  by 
Froben,  1542,  fol.,  1574,  fol.  The  best  edition,  however,  is  that  of  Wyttenbach,  the  labor 
of  four-and-twenty  years.  It  was  printed  at  Oxford  in  4to.  It  consists  of  four  parts,  or 
six  volumes  of  text  (1795-1800)  and  two  volumes  of  notes  (1810-1821).  It  was  also 
printed  at  the  same  time  in  8vo,  14  vols.  There  is  also  a  Leipzig  edition  of  the  notes  of 
Wyttenbach,  1820-34,  3  vols.  8vo.  An  edition  of  the  Moralia,  by  Dubner,  2  vols.  large 
8vo,  forms  part  of  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  Paris,  1841,  and  claims  to  have  a  text  su 
perior  to  that  of  Wyttenbach.  A  useful  Index  Grcedtatis,  from  the  papers  of  Wyttenbach, 
was  published  at  Oxford,  2  vols.  8vo,  1830,  reprinted  at  Leipzig,  1843. 

XII.  ARRIANUS  ('A/J^tav^j),1  a  native  of  Nicomedia,  in  Bithynia,  born 
about  A.D.  90,  was  a  pupil  and  friend  of  Epictetus,  and  first  attracted  at 
tention  as  a  philosopher  by  publishing  at  Athens  the  lectures  of  his  mas 
ter.  In  A.D.  124,  he  gained  the  friendship  of  Hadrian  during  his  stay  in 
Greece,  and  received  from  the  emperor  the  Roman  citizenship.  From 
this  time  he  assumed  the  name  Flavius  Arrianus.  In  A.D.  136,  he  was 
appointed  prefect  of  Cappadocia,  which  was  invaded  the  year  after  by  the 
Alani  or  Massagetae,  whom  he  defeated.  Under  Antoninus  Pius,  in  A.D. 
146,  Arrian  was  consul  ;  and  about  A.D.  150,  he  withdrew  from  public 
life,  and  from  this  time  lived  in  his  native  town  of  Nicomedia,  as  priest 
of  Ceres  and  Proserpina.  He  died  at  an  advanced  age,  in  the  reign  of 
Marcus  Aurelius.  Arrian  was  one  of  the  best  and  most  active  writers  of 
his  time.  He  was  a  close  imitator  of  Xenophon,  both  in  the  subjects  of 
his  works  and  in  the  style  in  which  they  were  written.  He  regarded  his 
relation  to  Epictetus  as  similar  to  that  of  Xenophon  to  Socrates,2  and  it 
wras  his  endeavor  to  carry  out  that  resemblance.  With  this  view  he  pub 
lished,  1.  The  Philosophical  Lectures  of  his  master  (Aiarpiftal  'ETTIKT^TOV"), 
in  eight  books,  the  first  half  of  which  is  still  extant.  2.  An  Abstract  of 
the  practical  philosophy  of  Epictetus  ('Eyxet/n'Stoj/  'ETTJKT^TOU),  which  is 
still  extant.  This  celebrated  work  maintained  its  authority  for  many 
centuries  with  both  Christians  and  pagans.  He  also  published  other 
works  relating  to  Epictetus,  which  are  now  lost.  His  original  works  are, 
3.  A  Treatise  on  the  Chase  (Kuy^eri/cck),  which  forms  a  kind  of  supple- 


Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  s  Photnis,  p.  17,  B,  ed.  Bekker  ;  Suid.,  s.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  463 

ment  to  Xenophon's  work  on  the  same  subject,  and  is  printed  in  most 
editions  of  Xenophon's  works.  4.  The  History  of  the  Asiatic  Expedition 
of  Alexander  the  Great  ('Avaficuns  'A.\e£dv$pov),  in  seven  books,  and  the  most 
important  of  Arrian's  works.  This  great  work  reminds  the  reader  of 
Xenophon's  Anabasis,  not  only  by  its  title,  but  also  by  the  ease  and  clear 
ness  of  the  style.  It  is  also  of  great  value  for  its  historical  accuracy, 
being  based  upon  the  most  trustworthy  histories  written  by  the  contem 
poraries  of  Alexander,  especially  those  of  Ptolemy,  son  of  Lagus,  and  of 
Aristobulus,  the  son  of  Aristobulus.  The  work  likewise  shows  that  Ar- 
rian  possessed  a  thorough  practical  knowledge  of  military  affairs.  5.  On 
India  ('Ii/Si/dy,  or  TO.  'I»>St/ca),  which  may  be  regarded  as  a  continuation  of 
the  Anabasis.  This  work  is  written  in  the  Ionic  dialect,  in  imitation, 
probably,  of  Ctesias,  whose  work  on  the  same  subject  Arrian  wished  to 
supplant  by  a  more  trustworthy  and  correct  account.  6.  A  Description  of 
a  Voyage  around  the  Coasts  of  the  Euxine  (n.fp'nr\ovs  irdvrov  Eu|etVou),  which 
had  undoubtedly  been  made  by  Arrian  himself  during  his  government  of 
Cappadocia.  This  Periplus  has  come  down  to  us,  together  with  a  Peri- 
plus  of  the  Erythraean,  and  a  Periplus  of  the  Euxine  and  Palus  Maeotis, 
both  of  which  also  bear  the  name  of  Arrian,  but  belong  undoubtedly  to  a 
later  period.  7.  A  Work  on  Tactics  (A(fyos  To/crt/co's,  or  Te'xnj  ra/cTi/cTj),  of 
which  we  possess  at  present  only  a  fragment.  Arrian  wrote  also  numer 
ous  other  works  which  are  now  lost.  These  were  principally  of  an  his 
torical  nature,  and  composed  during  the  latter  part  of  his  life.  Among 
them  we  may  mention,  1.  A  History  of  the  Successors  of  Alexander  the 
Great  (To.  ^ra.  'AAe'£av8f>oj/),  in  ten  books,  of  which  an  abstract,  or,  rather, 
an  enumeration  of  contents,  is  preserved  in  Photius.  2.  A  History  of  the 
Parthians  (TtapQiKa),  in  seventeen  books,  the  main  subject  of  which  was 
their  wars  with  the  Romans,  especially  under  Trajan.  3.  A.  History  of 
Bithynia  (Bi6wiKa),  in  eight  books.  This  work  began  with*  the  mythical 
age,  and  carried  the  history  down  to  the  time  when  Bithynia  became 
united  with  the  Roman  empire,  and  in  it  the  author  mentioned  several 
events  connected  with  his  own  life.  4.  A  History  of  the  Alani  ('A\avtK-f], 
or  ret  /car'  'AXavovs).  He  had  defeated  this  people  when  praefect  of  Cap 
padocia,  in  A.D.  136. 

The  Atarpt/Sai  'ETTIKT^TOV  were  first  printed  by  Trincavelli,  1535,  and  afterward,  to 
gether  with  the  'EyxeipiStov  and  Simplicius's  commentary,  with  a  Latin  translation,  by 
H.  Wolf,  Basle,  1560.  The  best  editions  are  in  Schweighaeuser's  Epictetece  Philosophic 
Monumenta,  vol.  iii.,  and  in  Coraes'  Ilapep-ya  'EAAijv.  Bi/3Aio0.,  vol.  viii.  The  'EyxeipiSiov 
was  first  published  in  a  Latin  translation  by  Politian,  Rome,  1493  ;  and  1496,  by  Berval- 
dus,  at  Bologna.  The  Greek  original,  with  the  commentary  of  Simplicius,  appeared  first 
at  Venice,  1528,  4to.  This  edition  was  soon  followed  by  numerous  others.  The  best 
among  the  recent  editions  are  those  of  Schweighaeuser  and  Coraes,  in  the  collections 
above  mentioned.  The  Kviaj-yeriKos  is  contained  in  Zeune's  Opuscula  Minora  of  Xeno- 
phon  ;  in  Schneider's  edition  of  Xenophon,  vol.  vi.,  best  in  Sauppe's  revision  of  Schnei 
der,  vol.  vi. ;  and,  as  already  remarked,  in  many  other  editions  of  Xenophon.  The  best 
editions  of  the  Anabasis  are  by  Ellendt,  Regirnontii,  1832,  2  vols.  8vo ;  by  Kruger,  Ber 
lin,  1835-48,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  'IvSiKrj  is  usually  printed  at  the  end  of  the  Anabasis  ;  sep 
arately  by  Schmieder,  Halle,  1798,  8vo.  The  Peripluses  are  contained  in  the  collection  of 
the  minor  works  of  Arrian  by  Blancard,  Amsterdam,  1683  and  1750,  and  also  in  Hudson's 
Geographi  Minorca,  and  in  Gail's  and  Hoffmann's  collections  of  the  minor  geographers. 
The  work  on  Tactics  is  printed  in  Blancard's  collection.  The  best  and  most  complete 


464  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

edition  of  the  entire  works  of  Arrian  is  by  Dubner  and  C.  Miiller,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca 
Graca,  Paris,  1846,  8vo. 

XIII.  APPIANUS  ('ATTTrtai/os),1  a  native  of  Aiexandrea,  lived  at  Rome 
during  the  reigns  of  Trajan,  Hadrian,  and  Antoninus  Pius,  as  we  gather 
from  various  passages  in  his  work.  We  have  hardly  any  particulars  of 
his  life,  for  his  autobiography,  to  which  he  refers  at  the  end  of  the  pref 
ace  to  his  history,  is  now  lost.  In  the  same  passage  he  mentions  that 
he  was  a  man  of  considerable  distinction  at  Aiexandrea,  and  afterward 
removed  to  Rome,  where  he  was  engaged  in  pleading  causes  in  the  courts 
of  the  emperors.  He  further  states  that  the  emperors  considered  him 
worthy  to  be  intrusted  with  the  management  of  their  affairs,  which 
Schweighaeuser  and  others  interpret  to  mean  that  he  was  appointed  to 
the  office  of  procurator  or  praefectus  of  Egypt.  There  is,  however,  no 
reason  for  this  supposition.  We  know,  from  a  letter  of  Fronto,  that  it 
was  the  office  of  procurator  which  he  held  ;  but  whether  he  had  the  man 
agement  of  the  emperor's  finances  at  Rome,  or  went  to  some  province  in 
this  capacity,  is  quite  uncertain. 

Appian  wrote  a  Roman  history  ('P&>,uai«c{,  or  'Pw/jLaiK^  'Iffropia),  in  twen 
ty-four  books,  on  a  plan  different  from  that  of  most  historians.  He  did 
not  treat  the  history  of  the  Roman  empire  as  a  whole,  in  chronological 
order,  following  the  series  of  events  ;  but  he  gave  a  separate  account  of 
the  affairs  of  each  country,  from  the  time  that  it  became  connected  with 
the  Romans  till  it  was  finally  incorporated  in  the  Roman  empire.  The 
first  foreign  people  with  whom  the  Romans  came  in  contact  were  the 
Gauls ;  and  consequently  his  history,  according  to  his  plan,  would  have 
begun  with  that  people.  But,  in  order  to  make  the  work  a  complete  his 
tory  of  Rome,  he  devoted  the  first  three  books  to  an  account  of  the  early 
times,  and  of  the  various  nations  of  Italy  which  Rome  subdued.  The 
subjects  of  the  different  books  were  :  1.  The  kingly  period.  2.  Italy.  3. 
The  Samnites.  4.  The  Gauls  or  Celts.  5.  Sicily  and  the  other  islands. 
6.  Spain.  7.  Hannibal's  wars.  8.  Libya,  Carthage,  and  Numid.ia.  9. 
Macedonia.  10.  Greece,  and  the  Greek  states  in  Asia  Minor.  11.  Syria 
and  Parthia.  12.  The  war  with  Mithradat.es.  13-21.  The  civil  wars 
('E/^uAia),  in  nine  books,  from  those  of  Marius  and  Sulla  to  the  battle  of 
Actium.  The  last  four  books,  also,  had  the  title  of  TO  AlyvwrtaKa.  22. 
'EKarovrafTta,  comprising  the  history  of  a  hundred  years,  from  the  battle 
of  Actium  to  the  beginning  of  Vespasian's  reign.  23.  The  wars  with  II- 
lyria.  24.  Those  with  Arabia. 

We  possess  only  eleven  of  these  complete,  namely,  the  sixth,  seventh, 
eighth,  eleventh,  twelfth,  thirteenth,  fourteenth,  fifteenth,  sixteenth,  sev 
enteenth,  and  twenty- third.  There  are  also  fragments  of  several  of  the 
others.  The  Parthian  history,  which  has  come  down  to  us  as  part  of  the 
eleventh  book,  has  been  proved  by  Schweighaeuser  to  be  no  work  of  Ap 
pian,  but  merely  a  compilation  from  Plutarch's  lives  of  Antony  and  Cras- 
sus,  probably  made  in  the  Middle  Ages.  Appian's  work  is  a  mere  com 
pilation.  In  the  early  times  he  chiefly  followed  Dionysius,  as  far  as  the 
latter  went,  and  his  work  makes  up,  to  a  considerable  extent,  for  the 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  465 

books  of  Dionysius  which  are  lost.  In  the  history  of  the  second  Punic 
war,  Fabius  seems  to  have  been  his  chief  authority,  and  subsequently  he 
made  use  of  Polybius.  His  style  is  clear  and  simple  ;  but  he  possesses 
few  merits  as  an  historian,  and  he  frequently  makes  the  most  absurd 
blunders.  Thus,  for  instance,  he  places  Saguntum  on  the  north  of  the 
Iberus,  and  states  that  it  takes  only  half  a  day  to  sail  from  Spain  to  Britain. 

Appian's  history  was  first  published  in  a  barbarous  Latin  translation,  by  Candidus, 
at  Venice,  in  1472.  A  part  of  the  Greek  text  was  first  published  by  Carolus  Stephanus, 
Paris,  1551 ;  which  was  followed  by  an  improved  Latin  version,  by  Gelenius,  put  forth, 
after  the  death  of  the  latter,  at  Basle,  1554.  The  Greek  text  of  the  portion  of  the  work 
relating  to  Spain  and  Hannibal's  wars  was  published  for  the  first  time  by  H.  Stephanus, 
Geneva,  1557.  Ursinus  published  some  fragments  at  Antwerp,  1582.  The  second  edition 
of  the  Greek  text  was  edited,  with  the  Latin  version  of  Gelenius,  by  H.  Stephanus,  Gen 
eva,  1592.  The  twenty-third  book  of  Appian,  containing  the  wars  with  Illyria.  was  first 
published  by  Hoeschelius,  Augsburg,  1599,  and  some  additional  fragments  were  added 
by  Valesius,  Paris,  1634.  The  third  edition  of  Appian's  work  was  published  at  Amster 
dam  in  1670,  and  is  a  mere  reprint  of  the  edition  of  El.  Stephanus.  The  work  bears  on 
the  title-page  the  name  of  Alexander  Tollius,  but  he  did  absolutely  nothing  for  the  work, 
arid  allowed  the  typographical  errors  to  remain.  The  fourth  edition,  and  infinitely  su 
perior  to  all  that  went  before,  is  that  of  Schweighaeuser,  Leipzig,  1785,  3  vols.  8vo.  A 
few  new  fragments  of  Appian  were  published  by  Mai,  in  the  second  volume  of  his  Nova 
Collectio  Vet.  Script.  They  are  reprinted  in  "  Polybii  et  Appiani  Historiarum  Excerpta 
Vaticana,"  &c.,  edited  by  Lucht,  Altona,  1830.  Mai  also  discovered  a  letter  of  Appian 
to  Fronto  (p.  229  in  Niebuhr's  edition  of  Fronto).  The  latest,  and  probably  the  best  edi 
tion  of  the  text  of  Appian,  is  that  forming  part  of  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  in  which  the 
text  and  Latin  version  of  Schweighaeuser  have  been  corrected  from  the  private  memo 
randa  of  that  editor.  It  contains,  also,  the  fragments  discovered  by  Mai. 

XIV.  DION  CASSIUS  CoccEiANus,1  the  celebrated  historian  of  Rome, 
probably  derived  the  gentile  name  of  Cassius  from  one  of  his  ancestors, 
who,  on  receiving  the  Roman  franchise,  had  been  adopted  into  the  Cas 
sia  gens ;  for  his  father,  Cassius  Apronianus,  had  already  borne  it.  He 
appears  to  have  adopted  the  cognomen  of  Cocceianus  from  Dion  Chry- 
sostomus  Cocceianus  the  orator,  who,  according  to  Reimarus,  was  his 
grandfather  on  the  mother's  side.  Dion  Cassius  was  born  about  A.D. 
155,  at  Nicaea,  in  Bithynia.  His  father  was  a  Roman  senator.  He  was 
educated  with  great  care,  and  was  trained  in  the  rhetorical  schools  of  the 
time,  and  in  the  study  of  the  classical  writers  of  ancient  Greece.  He 
accompanied  his  father  to  Cilicia,  of  which  the  latter  had  the  administra 
tion,  and  after  his  father's  death  he  went  to  Rome,  about  A.D.  180.  He 
was  straightway  made  a  senator,  and  frequently  pleaded  in  the  courts  of 
justice.  He  was  aedile  and  quaestor  under  Commodus,  and  praetor  under 
Septimius  Severus,  A.D.  194.  He  accompanied  Caracalla  on  his  journey 
to  the  East ;  was  appointed  by  Macrinus  to  the  government  of  Pergamus 
and  Smyrna,  A.D.  218  ;  was  consul  about  A.D.  220 ;  proconsul  of  Africa, 
A.D.  224,  under  Alexander  Severus,  by  whom  he  was  sent  as  legate  to 
Dalmatia  in  A.D.  226,  and  to  Pannonia  in  the  following  year.  In  the  lat 
ter  province  he  restored  strict  discipline  among  the  troops,  which  excited 
the  discontent  of  the  praetorians  at  Rome,  who  demanded  his  life  of  Al 
exander  Severus.  But  the  emperor  protected  him,  and  raised  him  to  his 
second  consulship,  A.D.  229.  Dion,  however,  retired  to  Campania,  and 
i  Smith,  Diet.  Bwgr.t  a,  v. 


466  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

shortly  afterward  obtained  permission  from  the  emperor  to  return  to  his 
native  town  Nicaea,  where  he  passed  the  remainder  of  his  days. 

Dion  wrote  several  historical  works,  but  the  most  important  was  a 
History  of  Rome  ('Po^ai'/c);  'loTopm),  which  alone  has  come  down  to  us, 
though  in  a  sadly  mutilated  state,  only  a  comparatively  small  portion 
having  reached  us  entire.  It  consisted  originally  of  eighty  books,  and 
was  farther  divided  into  decades,  like  Livy's  Roman  history.  It  embraced 
the  whole  history  of  Rome  from  the  earliest  times ;  that  is,  from  the 
landing  of  ^Eneas  in  Italy  down  to  A.D.  229,  the  year  in  which  Dion  quit 
ted  Italy  and  returned  to  Nicaea.  Of  the  first  thirty-four  books  we  possess 
only  fragments ;  but  since  Zonaras,  in  his  annals,  chiefly  followed  Dion 
Cassius,  we  may  regard  the  annals  of  Zonaras  as,  to  some  extent,  an  epit 
ome  of  Dion  Cassius.  Of  the  thirty-fifth  book  we  possess  a  considerable 
fragment,  and  from  the  thirty-sixth  book  to  the  fifty-fourth  the  work  is 
extant  complete,  and  embraces  the  history  from  the  wars  of  Lucullus  and 
Pompey  against  Mithradates,  down  to  the  death  of  Agrippa,  B.C.  10.  Of 
the  remaining  books  we  have  only  the  epitomes  made  by  Xiphilinus  and 
others.  Dion  Cassius  himself  intimates  that  he  treated  the  history  of  re 
publican  Rome  briefly,  but  that  he  endeavored  to  give  a  more  minute  and 
detailed  account  of  those  events  of  which  he  had  himself  been  an  eye 
witness.1 

Notwithstanding  the  great  losses  which  the  work  has  experienced,  we 
still  possess  a  sufficient  portion  to  enable  us  to  form  a  correct  estimate 
of  its  value.  It  contains  an  abundance  of  materials  for  the  later  history 
of  the  republic,  and  for  a  considerable  period  of  the  empire,  for  some  por 
tions  of  which  it  is  our  only  source  of  information.  In  some  of  the  frag 
ments  published  by  Mai,  and  to  which  we  shall  again  allude  in  our  account 
of  the  editions  of  the  work,  Dion  distinctly  states  that  he  had  read  nearly 
every  thing  which  had  been  written  on  the  history  of  Rome,  and  that  he 
did  not,  like  a  mere  compiler,  put  together  what  he  found  in  other  writers, 
but  that  he  weighed  his  authorities,  and  exercised  his  judgment  in  select 
ing  what  he  thought  fit  for  a  place  in  his  work.  This  assertion  of  the 
author  himself  is  perfectly  justified  by  the  nature  and  character  of  his  his 
tory,  for  it  is  manifest  every  where  that  he  had  acquired  a  thorough 
knowledge  of  his  subject,  and  that  his  notions  of  Roman  life  and  Roman 
institutions  were  far  more  correct  than  those  of  some  of  his  predecessors, 
such  as  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus.  Whenever  he  is  led  into  error,  it  is 
generally  owing  to  his  not  having  access  to  authentic  sources,  and  to  his 
being  obliged  to  satisfy  himself  with  secondary  ones.  It  must  also  be 
borne  in  mind,  as  Dion  himself  observes,  that  the  history  of  the  empire 
presented  many  more  difficulties  to  the  historian  than  that  of  the  republic. 
In  those  parts  in  which  he  relates  contemporary  events,  his  work  forms 
a  sort  of  medium  between  real  history  and  mere  memoirs  of  the  emper 
ors.  His  object  was  to  give  a  record  as  complete  and  as  accurate  as 
possible  of  all  the  important  events  ;  but  his  work  is  not,  on  that  account, 
a  dry  chronological  catalogue  of  events,  for  he  endeavors,  like  Thucyd- 
ides,  Polybius,  and  Tacitus,  to  trace  the  events  to  their  causes,  and  to 
i  Smith,  J.  c. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  467 

unfold  the  motives  of  men's  actions.  Indeed,  in  his  endeavor  to  make 
us  see  the  connection  of  occurrences,  he  sometimes  even  neglects  the 
chronological  order,  like  his  great  models. 

But  with  all  these  excellences,  Dion  Cassius  is  the  equal  neither  of 
Thucydides  nor  of  Tacitus,  though  we  may  admit  that  his  faults  are,  to 
a  great  extent,  rather  those  of  his  age  than  of  his  individual  character  as 
an  historian.  He  had  been  trained  in  the  schools  of  the  rhetoricians,  and 
the  consequences  of  it  are  visible  in  his  history,  which  is  not  free  from  a 
rhetorical  tinge,  especially  in  the  speeches  which  are  introduced  in  it. 
In  the  formation  of  his  style  he  appears  to  have  endeavored  to  imitate 
the  classic  writers  of  ancient  Greece  ;  but  his  language  is,  nevertheless, 
full  of  peculiarities,  barbarisms,  and  Latinisms,  probably  the  consequence 
of  his  long  residence  in  Italy  ;  and  the  praise  which  Photius  bestows  upon 
him  for  the  clearness  of  his  style  must  be  greatly  modified,  for  it  is  often 
harsh  and  heavy,  and  Dion  seems  to  have  written  as  he  spoke,  without 
any  attempt  at  elegance  or  refinement. 

The  first  edition  of  Dion  Cassius  in  the  original  Greek  is  that  of  R.  Stephens,  Paris, 
1548,  fol.,  which  contains  from  book  thirty-five  to  sixty.  H.  Stephens  then  gave  a  new 
edition,  with  a  Latin  translation  by  Xylander,  Geneva,  1591,  fol.  The  epitome  of  Xiphi- 
linus,  from  book  sixty  to  eighty,  was  first  printed  in  the  edition  of  Leunclavius,  Frank 
fort,  1592,  and  Hanau,  1606,  fol.  After  the  fragments  and  eclogas  collected  by  Ursinus 
and  Valesius  had  been  published,  Fabricius  formed  the  idea  of  preparing  a  complete  and 
comprehensive  edition  of  Dion  Cassius ;  but  his  death  prevented  the  completion  of  his 
plan,  which  was  carried  out  by  his  son-in-law  Reimarus,  who  published  his  edition  at 
Hamburg,  1750-52,  in  2  vols.  fol.  The  Greek  text  is  not  much  improved  in  this  edition, 
but  the  commentary  and  the  indexes  are  of  very  great  value.  The  Latin  translation  which 
it  contains  is  made  up  of  those  of  Xylander  and  Leunclavius.  A  more  recent  edition  is 
that  of  Sturz,  in  9  vols.  8vo,  Leipzig,  1824,  the  ninth  volume  of  which  (published  in  1843) 
contains  the  "  Excerpta  Vaticana,"  which  had  been  first  discovered  and  published  by 
Mai  (Script.  Vet.  Nov.  Collect.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  135,  seqq.).  These  excerpta  were  published  from 
a  Vatican  MS.,  and  bear,  indeed,  the  name  of  Dion  Cassius,  but  are,  in  all  probability, 
taken  from  the  work  of  some  Christian  writer,  who  continued  the  work  of  Dion.  They 
belonged,  in  fact,  to  a  work  containing  the  history,  from  the  time  of  Valerian  down  to 
that  of  Constantiiie  the  Great.  A  few  more  fragments  were  published  by  Haase  (Bonn, 
1840,  8vo),  who  found  them  in  a  Paris  MS. 

XV.  HERODIANUS  ('HpwStaj/o's),1  a  writer  on  Roman  history.  He  was  a 
Greek,  though  he  appears  to  have  lived  for  a  considerable  period  in  Rome, 
but  without  holding  any  public  office.  From  his  work,  which  is  still  ex 
tant,  we  may  gather  that  he  was  still  living  at  an  advanced  age  in  the 
reign  of  Gordian  III.,  who  ascended  the  throne  A.D.  238.  Beyond  this 
we  know  nothing  respecting  his  life.  His  history  extends  over  the  period 
from  the  death  of  M.  Aurelius  (A.D.  180)  to  the  commencement  of  the 
reign  of  Gordian  III.  (A.D.  238),  and  bears  the  title  'HpwStavov  rys  psra. 
MdpKov  &a(Ti\tia.s  Iffropiwv  ftift\ia  OKTU.  He  himself  informs  us  that  the 
events  of  this  period  had  occurred  in  his  own  lifetime.  Photius  gives  an 
outline  of  the  contents  of  the  work,  and  passes  a  flattering  encomium  on 
the  style  of  Herodian,  which  he  describes  as  clear,  vigorous,  and  agree 
able,  preserving  a  happy  medium  between  an  utter  disregard  of  art  and 
elegance,  and  a  profuse  employment  of  the  artifices  and  prettinesses  which 
were  known  under  the  name  of  Atticism,  as  well  as  between  boldness  and 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr,,  s.  v. 


468  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

bombast,  adding  that  not  many  historical  writers  are  his  superiors.  He 
appears  to  have  had  Thucydides  before  him,  to  some  extent,  as  a  model, 
both  for  style  and  for  the  general  composition  of  his  work,  like  him,  in 
troducing  here  and  there  speeches  wholly  or  in  part  imaginary.  In  spite 
of  occasional  inaccuracies  in  chronology  and  geography,  his  narrative  is, 
in  the  main,  truthful  and  impartial,  though  Julius  Capitolinus  and  others 
charge  him  with  partiality. 

The  best  editions  of  Herodian  are  that  by  Irmisch,  Leipzig,  1789-1805,  5  vols.  8vo  ;  by 
F.  A.  Wolf,  Halle,  1792,  8vo  ;  and  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1826. 

XVI.  JSLIANUS  CLAUDIUS  (KAavSios  AtAtcwo's)1  was  born,  according  to 
Suidas,  at  Praeneste,  in  Italy,  and  lived  at  Rome.  He  calls  himself  a 
Roman,2  as  possessing  the  rights  of  Roman  citizenship.  He  was  particu 
larly  fond  of  the  Greeks,  and  of  Greek  literature  and  oratory.3  He  stud 
ied  under  Pausanias  the  rhetorician,  and  imitated  the  style  of  Dion  Chry- 
sostom,  but  admired  Herodes  Atticus  more  than  all.  He  taught  rhetoric 
at  Rome  in  the  time  of  Hadrian,  and  hence  was  called  6  cro^ia-r^s.  So 
complete  was  the  command  which  he  acquired  over  the  Greek  language, 
that  he  could  speak  it  as  well  as  a  native  Athenian.  That  rhetoric,  how 
ever,  was  not  his  forte,  may  easily  be  inferred  from  the  style  of  his 
works  ;  and  he  appears  to  have  given  up  teaching  for  writing.  He  lived 
to  about  sixty  years  of  age. 

There  are  two  considerable  works  of  his  remaining:  one  a  collection 
of  miscellaneous  history  (llot/ftATj  'Icrropia),  in  fourteen  books,  commonly 
called  his  "  Varia  Historia,"  and  the  other  a  work  on  the  peculiarities  of 
animals  (Tlepl  ZoW  l5toT^rus)r  in  seventeen  books,  commonly  called  his 
"De  Animalium  Natural  The  former  work  contains  short  narrations 
and  anecdotes,  historical,  biographical,  antiquarian,  &c.,  selected  from 
various  authors,  generally  without  their  names  being  given,  and  on  a  great 
variety  of  subjects.  Its  chief  value  arises  from  its  containing  many  pas 
sages  from  works  of  older  authors  which  are  now  lost.  The  latter  work 
is  of  the  same  kind,  scrappy  and  gossiping.  It  is  partly  collected  from 
older  writers,  and  partly  the  result  of  his  own  observations.  This  book 
would  appear  to  have  become  a  popular  and  standard  work  on  zoology, 
since,  in  the  fourteenth  century,  Manuel  Philes,  a  Byzantine  poet,  found 
ed  upon  it  a  poem  on  animals.  The  similarity  of  plan  in  the  two  works, 
with  other  internal  evidences,  seems  to  show  that  they  were  both  writ 
ten  by  the  same  JElian,  and  not,  as  Voss  and  Valckenaer  conjecture,  by 
two  different  persons.  In  both  works  he  seems  desirous  to  inculcate 
moral  and  religious  principles,  and  he  wrote  some  treatises  expressly  on 
philosophical  and  religious  subjects,  especially  one  on  "  Providence"  (Tlfpi 
Tlpovoias),  in  three  books,  and  one  on  the  "Divine  Manifestations"  (Utpl 
Oeiuv  'Ej/epyewi/),  directed  against  the  Epicureans.  There  are  also  attrib 
uted  to  him  twenty  letters  on  husbandry  and  such  like  matters,  which 
are  by  feigned  characters,  are  written  in  a  rhetorical,  unreal  style,  and 
are  of  no  value. 

The  best  editions  of  the  Varia  Historia  are  by  Perizonius,  Ley  den,  1701,  8vo ;  by  Gro- 
novius,  Leyden,  1731,  2  vols.  4to,  and  by  Kiihn,  Leipzig,  1780,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  DC  Ani- 

i  Smith>  Diet.  Biogr.)*.  V.  a  y,  #.,  xil^  25.  a  V.  tf.,ix,,32>  xiU  23. 


ROMAN     PERIOD, 


469 


medium  Natura  was  edited  by  Gronovius,  London,  1744,  2  vols.  4to,  and  by  J.  G.  Schnei 
der,  Leipzig,  1784, 2  vols.  8vo.  The  last  edition  is  that  by  Jacobs,  Jena,  1832,  2  vols.  8vo. 
This  contains  the  valuable  materials  which  Schneider  had  collected  and  left  for  a  new 
edition.  The  letters  were  published  apart  from  the  other  works  by  Aldus  Manutius, 
in  his  "  Collectio  Epistolarum  Graicarum,"  Venice,  1499,  4to. 

XVII.  DEXIPPUS,  PUBLIUS  HERENNius,1  a  Greek  rhetorician  and  histo 
rian,  was  a  native  of  Attica,  and  lived  in  the  third  century  after  Christ, 
in  the  reigns  of  Claudius  Gothicus,  Aurelian,  Tacitus,  and  Probus,  until 
about  A.D.  280.2    He  was  regarded  by  his  contemporaries  and  by  later 
writers  as  a  man  of  most  extensive  learning,  and  he  was  honored  at 
Athens  with  the  highest  offices  in  the  state.     He  distinguished  himself 
also  in  fighting  against  the  Goths,  when  they  invaded  Greece  in  A.D.  262. 
He  was  the  author  of  three  historical  works  :  1 .  Ta  A«T«  'AA.e£a»/8po»',  a 
history  of  Macedonia  from  the  time  of  Alexander,  in  four  books.     By  way 
of  introduction,  the  author  prefixed  a  sketch  of  the  preceding  history,  from 
the  time  of  Caranus  to  Alexander.     2.  2iVrojuo»'  iVropjKoV,  a  chronological 
history,  from  the  Mythical  Ages  down  to  the  accession  of  Claudius  Goth 
icus,  A.D.  268.     It  consisted  of  twelve  books,  and  is  frequently  referred 
to  by  the  writers  of  the  Augustan  History.     3.  2/cuft/ca,  an  account  of  the 
war  of  the  Goths  or  Scythians,  in  which  Dexippus  himself  had  fought. 
It  commenced  in  the  reign  of  Decius,  and  was  brought  to  a  close  by  Au 
relian.     We  have  only  fragments  remaining  of  his  works,  which  show, 
however,  that  his  style  has  all  the  faults  of  the  late  Greek  rhetoricians. 
These  fragments,  which  have  been  greatly  increased  by  the  discoveries 
of  Mai,  have  been  collected  by  Bekker  and  Niebuhr,  in  the  first  volume 
of  the  Scriptorcs  Histories  Byzantina,  Bonn,  1829,  8vo. 

XVIII.  PHLEGON  ($\€'ycat/),3  a  native  of  Tralles,  in  Lydia,  was  a  freed- 
man  of  the  Emperor  Hadrian,  and  not  of  Augustus,  as  has  been  errone 
ously  asserted  by  some  writers  on  the  authority  of  Suidas.     Phlegon 
probably  survived  Hadrian,  since  his  work  on  the  Olympiads  came  down 
to  Ol.  229,  that  is,  A.D.  137,  which  was  the  year  before  the  death  of  that 
emperor.     He  wrote  the  following  works  :    1.  Hepl  0aujua<r/W,  a  small 
treatise  on  wonderful  events,  which  has  come  down  to  us,  but  the  begin 
ning  of  which  is  wanting.     It  is  a  poor  performance,  full  of  the  most 
ridiculous  tales.     2.  riepi  ,uaKpoj8iW,  likewise  extant,  consisting  of  only  a 
few  pages,  and  giving  a  list  of  persons  in  Italy  who  had  attained  the  age 
of  a  hundred  years  and  upward.     It  was  copied  from  the  registers  of  the 
censors  (<?£  O.VT&V  TUV  d7roTt^^<rewj/),  is  a  bare  enumeration  of  names,  and 
is  not  worthy  to  be  compared  with  the  work  on  the  same  subject  ascribed 
to  Lucian.     At  the  end  there  is  an  extract  from  the  Sibylline  oracles  of 
some  sixty  or  seventy  lines.     These  two  are  the  only  works  of  Phlegon 
that  have  come  down  to  us.     3.  'O\vfj.irioviKu>i'  ttal  xp°vlK">1'  o'wa-ywyTj, 
quoted  under  the  title  of  XpovoypaQiai  or  'OAu/iTnaSes,  in  seventeen  books, 
and  giving  an  account  of  the  Olympiads  from  01.  1  (B.C.  776)  to  01.  229 
(A.D.  137).     This  was  by  far  the  most  important  of  the  works  of  Phle 
gon.     The  commencement  of  the  book  is  preserved  in  the  MSS.  of  the 
other  works  of  Phlegon,  and  an  extract  from  it,  relating  to  the  177th 

Smith,  Diet.  Btogr.,  a.  v.      *  EMufasp.^  Vit.  Porpftj/n,  p.  21,      3  Smith,  Diet.  Pibgr.,  «.  t>. 


470  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Olympiad,  is  given  by  Photius,  but  with  these  exceptions,  and  a  few  ref 
erences  to  it  in  Stephanas  Byzantinus,  Eusebius,  Origen,  and  others,  the 
work  is  entirely  lost.  4.  'OXvpindSfs  eV  &i&\iois  77,  a  sort  of  abridgment 
of  the  preceding.  5.  A  life  of  Hadrian,  really  written  by  the  emperor 
himself,  though  published  as  the  work  of  Phlegon.  6.  TwaiKfs  £v  irote/ju- 
KOIS  ffvvercd  KO.I  avSpeiai,  a  small  treatise,  first  published  by  Heeren  (Bibl. 
d.  Alien  Literal,  und  Kunst,  part,  vi.,  Gottingen,  1789),  by  whom  it  is  as 
cribed  to  Phlegon ;  but  Westermann,  who  has  also  printed  it,  with  the 
other  works  of  Phlegon,  thinks  that  it  was  not  written  by  him.  There 
were,  besides  these,  two  or  three  other  unimportant  works. 

The  editio  princeps  of  Phlegon  was  edited  by  Xylander,  along  with  Antoninus  Liberalis, 
Antigonus,  and  similar  writers,  Basle,  1568.  The  next  edition  was  by  Meursius,  Ley- 
den,  1620,  which  was  reprinted  by  Gronovius,  in  his  Thesaurus  of  Greek  Antiquities, 
vols.  viii.  and  ix.  The  third  edition  was  by  Franz,  1775,  of  which  a  new  edition  ap 
peared  in  1822,  Halle,  with  the  notes  of  Bast.  The  most  recent  edition  is  by  Wester 
mann,  in  his  HapaSo$oyp<i(j>o<.,  Scriptores  Rerum  Mirabilium  GraBci,  Brunswick,  1839.  The 
fragments  on  the  Olympiads  are  given  in  the  Oxford  edition  of  Pindar,  1697,  fol.,  and  in 
Krause's  Olympia,  Vienna,  1838. 

XIX.  AFRICANUS  SEXTUS  JuLius,1  a  Christian  writer  at  the  beginning 
of  the  third  century,  called  by  Suidas  a  Libyan,  but  who  passed  the  greater 
part  of  his  life  at  Emmaus,  in  Palestine,  where,  according  to  some,  he 
was  born.2  He  went  to  Alexandrea  to  hear  the  philosopher  Heraclas, 
who  was  afterward  bishop  of  that  city.  The  later  Syrian  writers  state 
that  he  was  subsequently  made  bishop  himself.  He  was  one  of  the  most 
learned  of  the  early  Christian  writers.  Socrates3  classes  him  with  Ori 
gen  and  Clement.  His  chief  work  was  a  Chronicon,  in  five  books  (riej/ra-. 
&fi\ov  xpo"oA.o7<K0'i/),  from  the  creation  of  the  world,  which  he  placed  in 
B.C.  5499,  to  A.D.  221,  the  fourth  year  of  the  reign  of  Elagabalus.  The 
work  is  lost,  but  a  considerable  part  of  it  is  extracted  by  Eusebius  in  his 
"  Chronicon,"  and  many  fragments  of  it  also  are  preserved  by  Georgius 
Syncellus,  Cedrenus,  and  in  the  "  Paschale  Chronicon."  The  fragments 
of  this  work  are  given  by  Gallandi  (Bibl.  Pat.)  and  Routh  (Reliquiae.  Sacra). 
Africanus  wrote  a  letter  to  Origen  impugning  the  authority  of  the  book 
of  Susanna,  to  which  Origen  replied.  This  letter  is  extant,  and  has  been 
published,  together  with  Origen's  answer,  by  Wetstein,  Basle,  1674,  4to. 
It  is  also  contained  in  De  la  Rue's  edition  of  Origen.  He  also  wrote  a 
letter  to  Aristides  on  the  genealogies  of  Christ  in  Matthew  and  Luke,  of 
which  some  extracts  are  given  by  Eusebius. 

There  is  another  work  attributed  to  Africanus,  entitled  KCO-TOJ,  that  is, 
embroidered  girdles,  so  called  from  the  celebrated  /cetrrJs  of  Venus.  Ac 
cording  to  Suidas,  it  contained  twenty-four  books ;  but  according  to  Pho 
tius,  fourteen ;  and  according  to  Syncellus,  nine.  It  treated  of  a  vast 
variety  of  subjects — medicine,  agriculture,  natural  history,  the  military 
art,  &c.,  and  seems  to  have  been  a  kind  of  commonplace  book,  in  which 
the  author  entered  the  results  of  his  reading.  Some  of  the  books  are  said 
to  exist  still  in  manuscript.  Some  extracts  from  them  are  published  by 
Thevenot,  in  the  "  Mathematici  Veteres,"  Paris,  1693,  and  also  in  the  Geo- 
ponica  of  Cassianus  Bassus. 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s~v.  2  Hieron.,  De  Vir.  III.,  63.    .        3  Hist.  EccL,  ii.,  35.  " 


ROMAN     PERIOD  471 


CHAPTER  XLVII. 

SIXTH  OR  ROMAN  PERIOD—  continued. 

SOPHISTS    AND    RHETORICIANS. 

INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS.1 

I.  THE  term  Sophist,  which  in  the  time  of  Socrates  and  Plato  had  been 
a  title  of  reproach,  became  under  the  Roman  emperors  an  honorary  ap 
pellation,  and  designated  a  particular  class  of  literary  men.     The  name 
was  now  given  to  those  who,  independently  of  the  talent  of  public  speak 
ing  and  extemporaneous  discourse,  occupied  themselves  with  what  we 
call  belles-lettres  studies,  but  with  the  exception  of  poetry. 

II.  As  some  of  this  class  of  individuals,  however,  devoted  themselves 
more  particularly  to  public  speaking  and  the  composition  of  discourses, 
and  others  to  writing  on  the  theory  of  the  art,  or  what  we  term  rhetoric, 
it  will  be  convenient  to  make  a  division  of  them  into  sophists  and  rhetori 
cians,  and  to  consider  each  class  in  succession. 

III.  In  the  period  which  we  are  at  present  considering,  public  speaking 
was  confined  to  the  bar,  public  lectures,  and  the  schools,  in  the  last  of 
which  imaginary  causes  were  pleaded  or  set  themes  discussed.     The 
lectures,  which  were  merely  a  species  of  public  declamation,  became  in 
time  extremely  popular,  and  proved  a  source  of  both  honor  and  riches. 
Sometimes,  however,  they  were  merely  essays,  intended  to  be  read  to  a 
chosen  few.     The  subjects  were  generally  of  a  moral,  philosophical,  or 
political  character,  and  the  aid  of  mythology  and  history  was  frequently 
called  in  to  render  these  oratorical  displays  more  interesting  and  showy. 

IV.  It  was  during  this  epoch  of  the  decline  of  eloquence  that  various 
specific  terms  began  to  be  applied  to  the  different  kinds  of  oratorical  com 
position  which  were  then  in  vogue.     Such,  for  instance,  were  the  follow 
ing  :   MeAerTj,  ~2,vara<ns,  Acfyos,  AaAta,  IIposAaAia,  SxeSiotTjWO,  AtciAe|ts,  'Eiri- 


V.  By  MeAerTj  was  meant  a  declamation,  carefully  prepared  and  re 
duced  to  writing,  in  which  the  author,  assuming  the  character  of  some 
personage  of  antiquity,  or  of  some  mythological  individual,  treated  of  an 
imaginary  subject  as  if  really  existing.  The  SiVratm  was  a  short  dis 
course,  by  which  the  speaker  sought  to  recommend  himself  to  some  pro 
tector.  The  term  A6yos  was  generic,  and  denoted  every  kind  of  compo 
sition  or  discourse,  but  chiefly  a  harangue  on  some  important  subject. 
The  UpoTpfTTTiKbs  Atfyos  was,  in  particular,  a  discourse  addressed  to  a  pub 
lic  assembly,  exhorting  them  to  form  some  resolve,  or,  as  was  oftentimes 
the  case,  a  moral  exhortation.  The  AaAia  was  what  we  would  call  a 
complimentary  address.  It  was  termed  Upos\a\td  when  it  served  as  an 
exordium  to  a  public  lecture.  The  2xe8iao>ta  designated  an  off-hand  or 
extemporaneous  speech.  The  Atd\^is  was  what  we  would  call  a  disser- 
i  ScMll,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  iv.,-p.  207,  aeqq. 


472  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

tation.     The  'E7r/§et|is  was  a  show-speech,  intended  for  some  formal  oc 
casion.1 

VI.  We  will  now  proceed  to  give  a  brief  account  of  the  more  important 
individuals  in  the  two  classes  just  referred  to. 

I.     SOPHISTS. 

I.  LESBONAX  (Aeor)8w>'a|),2  a  philosopher  and  sophist,  who  lived  in  the 
time  of  Augustus.     He  was  the  father  of  Polemon,  who  is  known  as  the 
teacher  and  friend  of  the  Emperor  Tiberius.     Suidas  says  that  he  wrote 
several  philosophical  works,  but  does  not  mention  that  he  was  an  orator 
or  rhetorician,  although  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  is  the  same  as 
the  Lesbonax  of  whom  there  were  extant  in  the  time  of  Photius3  sixteen 
political  orations.     Of  these  orations  only  two  have  come  down  to  us,  one 
entitled  irepl  rov  7roAe/u°u  KopivQ'uav,  and  the  other  a  TrporpeTniKbs  \6yos, 
both  of  which  are  not  unsuccessful  imitations  of  the  Attic  orators  of  the 
best  times.    They  are  printed  in  the  collections  of  the  Greek  orators  pub 
lished  by  Stephens,  Reiske,  Bekker,  &c.     A  separate  edition  was  pub 
lished  by  Orelli,  Leipzig,  1820,  8vo. 

II.  DION  CHRYSOSTOMUS  (AiW  Xpv<r6a-Tofj.os),*  that  is,  Dion  the  Golden- 
mouthed,  a  surname  which  he  owed  to  his  great  talents  as  an  orator.    He 
also  bore  the  surname  of  Cocceianus,  which  he  derived  from  the  Emperor 
Cocceius  Nerva,  with  whom  he  was  connected  by  intimate  friendship.8 
Dion  Chrysostom  was  born  at  Prusa,  in  Bithynia,  about  the  middle  of  the 
first  century  of  our  era,  and  belonged  to  a  distinguished  equestrian  family. 
He  received  a  careful  education,  increased  his  knowledge  by  travelling  in 
different  countries,  and  came  to  Rome  in  the  reign  of  Vespasian  ;  but,  hav 
ing  incurred  the  suspicion  of  Domitian,  he  was  obliged  to  leave  the  city. 
On  the  advice  of  the  Delphic  oracle,  it  is  said,  he  put  on  the  attire  of  a 
beggar,  and  with  nothing  in  his  pocket  but  a  copy  of  Plato's  Phaedon,  and 
the  oration  of  Demosthenes  on  the  Embassy,  he  visited  Thrace,  Mysia, 
Scythia,  and  the  country  of  the  Getae,  and,  owing  to  the  power  and  wis 
dom  of  his  orations,  he  met  every  where  with  a  kindly  xeception,  and  did 
much  good.6     When  Domitian  was  murdered,  Dion  used  his  influence 
with  the  army  stationed  on  the  frontier  in  favor  of  his  friend  Nerva,  and 
seems  to  have  returned  to  Rome  immediately  after  his  accession.7    Tra 
jan,  Nerva's  successor,  also  entertained  the  highest  esteem  for  him,  and 
showed  him  the  most  marked  favor,  for  he  is  said  to  have  often  visited 
him,  and  even  to  have  allowed  him  to  ride  by  his  side  in  his  triumphal 
car.     Dion  died  at  Rome  about  A.D.  117. 

Dion  Chrysostom  is  the  most  eminent  of  the  Greek  sophists  and  rhet 
oricians  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  empire.  There  are  extant  eighty  of 
his  orations ;  but  they  are  more  like  essays  on  political,  moral,  and  phil 
osophical  subjects  than  real  orations,  of  which  they  have  only  the  form. 
We  find  among  them  \6yoi  irepl  patriteias,  or  \6yoi  Pa<ri\ixoi,  four  orations 
addressed  to  Trajan  on  the  virtues  of  a  sovereign ;  Aioywris  y  -n-fpl  rvpav- 

1  Himerii  Opera,  ed.  Wernsdorff,  p.  20.  2  Smit.h,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s  r. 

3  Phot.,  Bill.  Cod.,  74,  p.  52.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v, 

6  Orat.  xlv.,  p.  513.  6  Orat.  xxxvi.,  p.  74.  7  Orat.  xlv,,  p.  202. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  473 

vi8os,  on  the  troubles  to  which  men  expose  themselves  by  deserting  the 
path  of  nature,  and  on  the  difficulties  which  a  sovereign  has  to  encounter  ; 
essays  on  slavery  and  freedom ;  on  the  means  of  attaining  eminence  as 
an  orator ;  political  discourses,  addressed  to  various  towns  ;  on  subjects 
of  ethics  and  practical  philosophy  ;  and,  lastly,  orations  on  mythical  sub 
jects,  and  epideictic  or  show-speeches.  Besides  these  eighty  orations, 
we  have  fragments  of  fifteen  others.  There  are  extant  also  five  letters 
under  the  name  of  Dion,  and  addressed  to  one  Rufus.  They  are  pub 
lished  in  Boissonade's  Marini  Vit.  Prod.,  p.  85,  seqg.,  and  some  critics  are 
inclined  to  consider  them  as  productions  of  Dion  Chrysostom. 

All  the  extant  orations  of  Dion  Chrysostom  are  distinguished  for  their 
refined  and  elegant  style.  The  author  most  successfully  imitated  the 
classic  writers  of  Greece,  such  as  Plato,  Demosthenes,  Hyperides,  and 
^Eschines.  His  ardent  study  of  those  models,  combined  with  his  own 
eminent  talents,  his  firm  and  pleasing  voice,  and  his  skill  in  extempore 
speaking,  raised  him  at  once  above  all  contemporary  rhetoricians  and 
sophists.  His  style  is  throughout  clear,  and,  generally  speaking,  free 
from  artificial  embellishment,  though  he  is  not  always  able  to  escape  from 
the  influence  of  the  Asiatic  school  of  rhetoric.  His  sentences  are  often 
interrupted  by  the  insertion  of  parenthetical  clauses,  and  his  procemia  are 
frequently  too  long  in  proportion  to  the  other  parts  of  his  discourses.  Still, 
as  Niebuhr  remarks,  he  was  an  author  of  uncommon  talent,  and  it  is  much 
to  be  regretted  that  he  belonged  to  the  rhetoricians  of  this  unfortunate  age. 

Passing  over  the  editions  of  separate  orations  of  Dion  Chrysostomus,  we  mention 
only  those  which  contain  all  of  them.  The  first  was  edited  by  Paravisinus,  at  Milan, 
1476,  4to,  and  was  followed  by  that  of  Aldus  Manutius,  Venice,  1551,  8vo.  The  next 
edition  of  importance  is  that  of  Morel,  Paris,  1601,  which  was  reprinted  in  1623,  with  a 
Latin  translation  of  Naogeorgius,  and  notes  by  Morel.  A  very  good  critical  edition  is 
that  of  Reiske,  Leipzig,  1784,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  best  edition,  however,  is  that  of  Empe- 
rius,  Brunswick,  1844,  8vo. 

III.  POLEMON  (UoXffjKav),1  a  highly  celebrated  sophist  and  rhetorician, 
who  flourished  under  Trajan,  Hadrian,  and  the  first  Antoninus,  and  was 
in  high  favor  with  the  two  former  emperors.2  He  is  placed  at  the  six 
teenth  year  of  Hadrian,  A.D.  133,  by  Eusebius.  He  was  born  of  a  con 
sular  family  at  Laodicea,  but  spent  the  greater  part  of  his  life  at  Smyrna. 
His  most  celebrated  disciple  was  Aristides.  Among  his  imitators  in  sub 
sequent  times  was  Gregory  Nazianzen.  His  style  of  oratory  was  im 
posing  rather  than  pleasing,  and  his  character  was  haughty  and  reserved. 
During  the  latter  part  of  his  life  he  was  so  tortured  by  the  gout,  that  he 
resolved  to  put  an  end  to  his  existence.  He  had  himself  shut  up  in  the 
tomb  of  his  ancestors,  at  Laodicea,  where  he  died  of  hunger,  at  the  age  of 
sixty-five.  The  only  extant  works  of  Polemon  are  the  funeral  orations 
for  Cynaegirus  and  Callimachus,  generals  who  fell  at  Marathon,  which  are 
supposed  to  be  pronounced  by  their  fathers,  each  extolling  his  own  son 
above  the  other.  Philostratus  mentions  several  others  of  his  rhetorical 
compositions,  the  subjects  of  which  are  chiefly  taken  from  Athenian  his 
tory,  and  an  oration  which  he  pronounced,  by  command  of  Hadrian,  at 
the  dedication  of  the  temple  of  Jupiter  Olympius  at  Athens,  in  A.D.  135, 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biagr.,  s.  v.  2  Philostr..  Vit.  Sophist.,  ii.r  25,  p.  530,  seqq. 


474 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


His  A.6yot  eTTira^iot  were  first  printed  by  H.  Stephens,  in  his  collection  of  the  Declama 
tions  of  Polemon,  Himerius,  and  other  rhetoricians,  Paris,  1547,  4to ;  and  were  after 
ward  published  by  themselves  in  Greek,  from  the  same  press,  Paris,  1586,  4to;  and  in 
Greek  and  Latin,  Toulouse,  1637,  8vo.  The  latest  and  best  edition  is  that  of  Caspar  and 
Conrad  Orelli,  Leipzig,  1819,  8vo. 

IV.  HERODES  ATTICUS,  TIBERIUS  CLAUDIUS,'  a  celebrated  Greek  sophist 
and  rhetorician,  born  about  A.D.  104,  at  Marathon,  in  Attica.  His  father, 
whose  name  was  likewise  Atticus,  discovered  on  his  estate  a  hidden 
treasure,  which  at  once  made  him  one  of  the  wealthiest  men  of  his  age. 
His  son  afterward  increased  this  wealth  by  marrying  the  rich  Annia  Re- 
gilla.  Old  Atticus  left  in  his  will  a  clause,  according  to  which  every 
Athenian  citizen  was  to  receive  yearly  one  mina  (about  $17  60)  out  of 
his  property  ;  bu^his  son  entered  into  a  composition  with  the  Athenians 
to  pay  them,  once  for  all,  five  minas  each.  As  Herodes,  however,  in  pay 
ing  the  Athenians,  deducted  the  debts  which  some  citizens  owed  to  his 
father,  they  were  exasperated  against  him,  and,  notwithstanding  the 
great  benefits  he  conferred  upon  Athens,  bore  him  a  grudge  as  long  as  he 
lived.  Herodes  received  a  very  careful  education  from  some  of  the  best 
instructors  of  the  day  ;  and,  after  completing  his  studies,  opened  a  school 
of  rhetoric  at  Athens,  and  subsequently  at  Rome  also,  where  Marcus  Au- 
relius  Antoninus,  who  ever  afterward  entertained  a  high  esteem  for  him, 
was  among  his  pupils.  In  A.D.  143,  the  Emperor  Antoninus  Pius  raised 
him  to  the  consulship  ;  but  as  Herodes  cared  more  for  his  fame  as  a  rhet 
orician  than  for  high  offices,  he  afterward  returned  to  Athens,  whither  he 
was  followed  by  a  great  number  of  young  men,  and  whither  L.  Verus  also 
was  sent  as  a  pupil  by  the  Emperor  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus. 

The  wealth  and  influence  of  Herodes  Atticus  did  not  fail  to  raise  up 
enemies.  His  public  and  private  life  were  attacked  in  various  ways, 
and  these  annoyances  at  last  appear  to  have  induced  him  to  retire  from 
public  life,  and  to  spend  his  remaining  years  in  his  villa  near  Marathon, 
surrounded  by  his  pupils.  The  Emperor  M.  Aurelius  sent  him  a  letter, 
in  which  he  assured  him  of  his  unaltered  esteem.  In  the  case  of  Herodes 
the  Athenians  drew  upon  themselves  the  just  charge  of  ingratitude,  for 
no  man  had  ever  done  so  much  to  assist  his  fellow-citizens,  and  to  em 
bellish  Athens  at  his  own  expense.  Among  the  great  architectural  works 
with  which  he  adorned  the  city,  we  may  mention  a  race-course  (stadium) 
of  white  Pentelic  marble,  of  which  ruins  are  still  extant,  and  the  magnifi 
cent  theatre  of  Regilla,  with  a  roof  made  of  cedar-wood.  His  liberality, 
however,  was  not  confined  to  Attica.  At  Corinth  he  built  a  theatre,  at 
Olympia  an  aqueduct,  at  Delphi  a  race-course,  and  at  Thermopylae  a  hos 
pital  ;  and  he  also  restored,  with  his  ample  means,  several  decayed  towns 
in  various  parts  of  Greece.  His  wealth,  generosity,  and,  still  more,  his 
skill  as  a  rhetorician,  spread  his  fame  over  the  whole  Roman  world.  He 
is  believed  to  have  died  at  the  age  of  76,  in  A.D.  ISO.8 

If  we  look  upon  Herodes  Atticus  as  a  man,  it  must  be  owned  that  there 
scarcely  ever  was  a  wealthy  person  who  spent  his  property  in  a  more 
generous,  noble,  and  disinterested  manner.  His  greatest  ambition,  how 
ever,  was  to  shine  as  a  rhetorician;  and  this  ambition,  indeed,  was  so 
i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Smith,  I.  c. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  475 

strong,  that,  on  one  occasion,  in  his  early  life,  when  he  had  delivered  an 
oration  before  the  Emperor  Hadrian,  who  was  then  in  Pannonia,  he  was 
on  the  point  of  throwing  himself  into  the  Danube,  because  his  attempt  at 
speaking  had  been  unsuccessful.  This  failure,  however,  appears  to  have 
proved  a  stimulus  to  him,  and  he  became  the  greatest  rhetorician  of  his 
century.  His  success  as  a  teacher  is  sufficiently  attested  by  the  great 
number  of  his  pupils,  most  of  whom  attained  some  degree  of  eminence. 
His  own  orations,  which  were  delivered  extempore  and  without  prepara 
tion,  are  said  to  have  excelled  those  of  all  his  contemporaries  by  the  dig 
nity,  fullness,  and  elegance  of  their  style.  Philostratus  praises  his  ora 
tory  for  its  pleasing  and  harmonious  flow,  as  well  as  for  its  simplicity 
and  power.  The  loss  of  the  works  of  Herodes  renders  it  impossible  for 
us  to  form  an  independent  opinion.  Among  his  numerous  productions, 
the  following  only  are  specified  by  the  ancients :  1.  A6yoi  ainoo-x&ioi,  or 
extemporaneous  speeches.  2.  AiaXf^ts,  treatises  or  dialogues.  3.  'Ec^- 
€pi5es,  or  diaries.  4.  'EirurroXal.  All  these  works  are  now  lost.  There 
exists  an  oration,  irepl  iro\irdas,  in  which  the  Thebans  are  called  upon  to 
join  the  Peloponnesians  in  preparing  for  war  against  Archelaus,  king  of 
Macedonia,  and  which  has  come  down  to  us  under  the  name  of  Herodes, 
but  its  genuineness  is  very  doubtful.  It  is  printed  in  the  collections  of 
the  Greek  orators,  and  by  Fiorillo  in  Herodis  Attici  qua  supersunt,  Leipzig, 
1801. 

V.  ADRIANUS  ('ASpjoi/^s),1  a  Greek  sophist  and  rhetorician,  born  at  Tyre, 
in  Phoenicia,  and  who  flourished  under  the  emperors  M.  Antoninus  and 
Commodus.     He  was  the  pupil  of  the  celebrated  Herodes  Atticus,  and 
obtained  the  chair  of  philosophy  at  Athens  during  the  life-time  of  his  mas 
ter.     His  advancement  does  not  seem  to  have  impaired  their  mutual  re 
gard.    Herodes  declared  that  the  unfinished  speeches  of  his  scholar  were 
"  the  fragments  of  a  Colossus,"  and  Adrianus  showed  his  gratitude  by  a 
funeral  oration  which  he  pronounced  over  the  ashes  of  his  master.     He 
appears,  notwithstanding,  to  have  been  a  very  vain  and  conceited  man. 
His  first  lecture  commenced  with  the  modest  encomium  on  himself,  Tra\iv 
CK  #oifiK7js  ypd/jL/jiara,  while,  in  the  magnificence  of  his  dress  and  equipage, 
he  affected  the  style  of  the  hierophant  of  philosophy.     The  visit  of  An 
toninus  to  Athens  made  him  acquainted  with  Adrianus,  whom  he  invited 
to  Rome,  and  honored  with  his  friendship.     After  the  death  of  that  em 
peror,  he  became  the  private  secretary  of  Commodus.     His  death  took 
place  at  Rome,  in  the  eightieth  year  of  his  age,  not  later  than  A.D.  192. 
Of  the  works  attributed  to  him  by  Suidas,  three  declamations  only  are 
extant. 

The  declamations  of  Adrianus  of  Tyre  have  been  edited  by  Leo  Allatius,  in  the  Ex- 
cerpta  Varia  Gr&corum  Sophistarum  ac  Rhetoricorum,  Rome,  1641,  and  by  Walz,  in  the 
Rhetores  Grasci,  vol.  i.,  p.  526,  seqq.,  Stuttg.,  1832. 

VI.  ARISTIDES,  P.  ^ELIUS  ('Apto-rei'STjs),2  surnamed  THEODORUS,  one  of 
the  most  celebrated  Greek  sophists  and  rhetoricians  of  the  second  cen 
tury  after  Christ,  was  born  at  Adriani,  in  Mysia,  in  A.D.  129,  according 
to  some,  bat  more  correctly,  according  to  others,  in  A.D.  117.    He  studied 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib.,  s.  t>. 


476  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

under  Herodes  Atticus  at  Athens,  and  subsequently  travelled  through 
Egypt,  Greece,  and  Italy.  The  fame  of  his  talents  and  acquirements 
was  so  great,  that  monuments  were  erected  to  his  honor  in  several  towns 
which  he  had  visited.1  Shortly  before  his  return,  he  was  attacked  by  an 
illness  which  lasted  thirteen  years,  but  which,  notwithstanding,  did  not 
prevent  him  from  prosecuting  his  studies.  He  subsequently  settled  at 
Smyrna,  and  when  this  city  was  nearly  destroyed  by  an  earthquake  in 
A.D.  178,  he  used  his  influence  with  the  Emperor  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus 
to  induce  him  to  assist  in  rebuilding  the  place.  The  Smyrneans  showed 
their  gratitude  to  Aristides  by  offering  him  various  honors  and  distinc 
tions,  most  of  which  he  refused.  He  accepted  only  the  office  of  priest 
of  ^Esculapius,  which  he  held  until  his  death,  about  A.D.  180. 

The  works  of  Aristides  which  have  come  down  to  us  are  fifty-five  ora 
tions  and  declamations  (including  those  which  were  discovered  by  Morelli 
and  Mai),  and  two  treatises  on  rhetorical  subjects,  of  little  value,  namely, 
Trepl  TroAm/coO  \6yov,  and  Trepl  a<pf\ovs  \6yov.  Some  of  his  orations  are 
eulogies  on  the  power  of  certain  divinities  ;  others  are  panegyrics  on 
towns,  such  as  Smyrna,  Cyzicus,  Rome.  One  among  them  is  a  Panathe- 
naicus  and  an  imitation  of  that  of  Isocrates.  Others,  again,  treat  of  sub 
jects  connected  with  rhetoric  and  eloquence.  The  six  orations  called 
iepol  \6yot  are  a  sort  of  diary  of  his  long  illness  and  recovery,  and  he  re 
lates  in  them  that  he  was  frequently  encouraged,  by  visions  in  his  dreams, 
to  cultivate  rhetoric  to  the  exclusion  of  all  other  studies.  They  have  at 
tracted  considerable  attention  in  modern  times  on  account  of  the  various 
stories  they  contain  respecting  the  cures  of  the  sick  in  temples,  and  on 
account  of  tbe  apparent  resemblance  between  these  cures  and  those  said 
to  be  effected  by  mesmerism.2  Aristides,  as  an  orator,  is  much  superior  to 
the  majority  of  sophists  in  his  time,  whose  great  and  only  ambition  was 
to  shine  and  make  a  momentary  impression  by  extempore  speeches,  and 
a  brilliant  and  dazzling  style  ;  although  it  must  be  confessed  that,  in  his 
panegyric  orations,  he  himself  often  endeavors  to  display  as  much  brill 
iancy  of  style  as  he  can.  On  the  whole,  his  manner  of  expression  is 
brief  and  concise,  but  too  frequently  deficient  in  ease  ami  clearness.  His 
sentiments  are  often  trivial,  and  spun  out  to  an  intolerable  length,  which 
leaves  the  reader  nothing  to  think  upon  for  himstii".  His  orations  remind 
us  of  a  man  who  is  fond  of  hearing  himself  talk.  Notwithstanding  these 
defects,  however,  Aristides  is  still  unsurpassed  by  most  of  his  contempo 
raries.  Several  learned  grammarians  wrote  commentaries  on  his  ora 
tions,  from  which  the  extant  scholia  are  probably  compilations. 

The  first  edition  of  the  orations  of  Aristides  (fifty-three  in  number)  is  that  published 
at  Florence,  1517,  fol.  A  better  edition,  with  some  of  the  Greek  scholia,  is  that  of  Jebb, 
Oxford,  1722,  2  vols.  4to.  Manv  corrections  of  the  text  of  this  edition  are  contained  in 
Reiske's  Animadversiones  in  Auctores  Graecns,  vol.  iii.  Morelli  published,  in  ]~f},  the 
oration  irpb?  AerrnVrji/  vnep  areXeta?,  which  he  had  discovered  in  a  Venetian  MS.  It  was 
afterward  edited  again  by  F.  A.  Wolf,  in  his  edition  of  Demosthenes's  oration  against 
Leptines,  Halle,  17S9  ;  and  by  Grauert,  in  his  Declamationes  Lfptinece,  Bonn,  1827,  8vo. 
This  edition  of  Grauert  contains  also  an  oration,  Trpb?  ATj/xorreeV^  n-epl  areAeia?,  which 
had  been  discovered  by  Mai,  and  publishsd  in  his  Nova  Collect.  Script.  Vet.,  vol.  i.,  p.  3. 

1  Aristid.,  Orat.  jEgypt.,ii.,  p.  331,  seqq.  2  Thorlacius,  Opusc.,  ii.,  p.  129,  seqq. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  477 

A  complete  edition  of  all  the  works  of  Aristides,  which  gives  a  correct  text  and  all  the 
scholia,  was  published  by  W.  Dindorf,  Leipzig,  1829,  3  vols.  8vo. 

VII.  LUCIANUS  (AovKiav6s},1  a  witty  and  voluminous  Greek  writer,  whom 
we  may  consider  under  the  present  head,  in  consequence  of  his  early  pur 
suits.  He  was  born  at  Samosata,  the  capital  of  Comrnagene,  in  Syria, 
probably  about  A.D.  120,  and  he  appears  to  have  lived  till  toward  the  end 
of  this  century.  We  know  that  some  of  his  more  celebrated  works  were 
written  in  the  reign  of  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus.  Lucian's  parents  were 
poor,  and  he  was  at  first  apprenticed  to  his  maternal  uncle,  who  was  a 
statuary.  He  afterward  became  an  advocate,  and  practiced  at  Antioch. 
Being  unsuccessful  in  this  calling,  he  employed  himself  in  writing  speeches 
for  others  instead  of  delivering  them  himself.  But  he  did  not  long  remain 
at  Antioch  ;  and,  at  an  early  period  of  his  life,  he  set  out  upon  his  travels, 
and  visited  the  greater  part  of  Greece,  Italy,  and  Gaul.  At  that  period  it 
was  customary  for  professors  of  the  rhetorical  art  to  proceed  to  different 
cities,  where  they  attracted  audiences  by  their  displays,  much  in  the  same 
manner  as  musicians  or  itinerant  lecturers  in  modern  times.  He  appears 
to  have  acquired  a  good  deal  of  money  as  well  as  fame.  On  his  return  to 
his  native  country,  probably  about  his  fortieth  year,  he  abandoned  the 
rhetorical  profession,  the  artifices  of  which,  he  tells  us,  were  foreign  to 
his  temper,  the  natural  enemy  of  deceit  and  pretension.  He  now  devoted 
most  of  his  time  to  the  composition  of  his  works.  He  still,  however,  oc 
casionally  travelled  ;  for  it  appears  that  he  was  in  Achaia  and  Ionia  about 
the  close  of  the  Parthian  war,  A.D.  160-165  :  on  which  occasion,  too,  he 
seems  to  have  visited  Olympia,  and  beheld  the  self-immolation  of  Pere- 
grinus.  About  A.D.  170,  or  a  little  previously,  he  visited  the  false  oracle 
of  the  impostor  Alexander,  in  Paphlagonia.  Later  in  life,  he  obtained  the 
office  of  procurator  of  part  of  Egypt,  which  office  was  probably  bestowed 
upon  him  by  the  Emperor  Commodus. 

The  nature  of  Lucian's  writings  inevitably  procured  him  many  enemies, 
by  whom  he  has  been  painted  in  very  black  colors.  According  to  Suidas, 
he  was  surnamed  the  Blasphemer,  and  was  torn  to  pieces  by  dogs  as  a 
punishment  for  his  impiety  ;  but  on  this  account  no  reliance  can  be  placed. 
Other  writers  state  that  Lucian  apostatized  from  Christianity,  but  there 
is  no  proof  in  support  of  this  charge  ;  and  the  dialogue  called  Philopatris, 
which  would  appear  to  prove  that  the  author  had  once  been  a  Christian, 
was  certainly  not  written  by  Lucian,  but  was  probably  composed  in  the 
reign  of  Julian  the  Apostate.  The  scholiast  on  the  Alexander,  §  47,  as 
serts  that  Lucian  was  an  epicurean,  and  this  opinion  has  been  followed 
by  several  modern  critics.  But,  though  his  natural  skepticism  may  have 
led  him  to  prefer  the  tenets  of  Epicurus  to  those  of  any  other  sect,  it  is 
most  probable  that  he  belonged  to  none  whatever.  Of  Lucian's  moral 
character  we  have  no  means  of  judging  except  from  his  writings,  a  method 
which  is  not  always  certain.  Several  of  his  pieces  are  loose  and  licen 
tious,  but  some  allowance  should  be  made  for  the  manners  of  the  age. 
Fn  the  Alexander,  ()  54,  he  seems  indignant  at  the  charge  of  immorality 
brought  against  him  by  that  impostor ;  and  that  he  must  at  least  have 
1  Smith.  Diet.  Biogr.,  ».  v. 


478 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


avoided  any  grievous  and  open  scandal,  may  be  presumed  from  the  high 
office  conferred  upon  him  in  Egypt.1 

As  many  as  eighty-two  works  have  come  down  to  us  under  the  name 
of  Lucian,  but  some  of  them  are  spurious.  The  most  important  of  them 
are  his  Dialogues.  They  are  of  very  various  degrees  of  merit,  and  are 
treated  in  the  greatest  possible  variety  of  style,  from  seriousness  down  to 
the  broadest  humor  and  buffoonery.  Their  subjects  and  tendency,  too, 
vary  considerably  ;  for,  while  some  are  employed  in  attacking  the  heathen 
philosophy  and  religion,  others  are  mere  pictures  of  manners,  without  any 
polemic  drift.  Our  limits  only  allow  us  to  mention  a  few  of  the  more  im 
portant  of  these  dialogues.  The  Dialogues  of  the  Gods,  twenty-six  in 
number,  consist  of  short  dramatic  narratives  of  some  of  the  most  popular 
incidents  in  the  heathen  mythology.  The  reader,  however,  is  generally 
left  to  draw  his  own  conclusions  from  the  story,  the  author  only  taking 
care  to  put  it  in  the  most  absurd  point  of  view.  In  the  Jupiter  Convicted, 
a  bolder  style  of  attack  is  adopted ;  and  the  cynic  proves  to  Jupiter's  face 
that,  every  thing  being  under  the  dominion  of  fate,  he  has  no  power  what 
ever.  As  this  dialogue  shows  Jupiter's  want  of  power,  so  the  Jupiter  the 
Tragedian  strikes  at  his  very  existence,  and  that  of  the  other  deities. 
The  Auction  of  Lives,  or  Sale  of  the  Philosophers,  is  an  attack  upon  the  an 
cient  philosophers.  In  this  humorous  piece  the  heads  of  the  different  sects 
are  put  up  for  sale,  Mercury  being  the  auctioneer.  The  Fisherman  is  a 
sort  of  apology  for  the  preceding  piece,  and  may  be  reckoned  among  Lu- 
cian's  best  dialogues.  The  philosophers  are  represented  as  having  ob 
tained  a  day's  life  for  the  purpose  of  taking  vengeance  upon  Lucian,  who 
confesses  that  he  has  borrowed  the  chief  beauties  of  his  writings  from 
them.2 

The.;Banquet,  or  the  Lapitha,  is  one  of  Lucian's  most  humorous  attacks 
on  the  philosophers.  The  scene  is  a  wedding  feast,  at  which  a  repre 
sentative  of  each  of  the  principal  philosophic  sects  is  present.  A  discus 
sion  ensues,  which  sets  all  the  philosophers  by  the  ears,  and  ends  in  a 
pitched  battle.  The  Nigrinus  is  also  an  attack  on  philosophic  pride ;  but 
its  main  scope  is  to  satirize  the  Romans,  whose  pomp,  vain-glory,  and 
luxury  are  unfavorably  contrasted  with  the  simple  habits  of  the  Athenians. 

The  more  miscellaneous  class  of  Lucian's  dialogues,  in  which  the  at 
tacks  upon  mythology  and  philosophy  are  not  direct,  but  incidental,  or 
which  are  mere  pictures  of  manners,  contains  some  of  his  best.  At  the 
head  must  be  placed  Timon,  which  may,  perhaps,  be  regarded  as  Lucian's 
master-piece.  The  Dialogues  of  the  Dead  are,  perhaps,  the  best  known 
of  all  Lucian's  works.  The  subject  affords  great  scope  for  moral  reflec 
tion,  and  for  satire  on  the  subject  of  human  pursuits.  Wealth,  power, 
beauty,  strength,  not  forgetting  the  vain  disputations  of  philosophy,  afford 
the  materials.  The  Icaro-Menippus  is  in  Lucian's  best  vein,  and  a  master 
piece  of  Aristophanic  humor.  Menippus,  disgusted  with  the  disputes  and 
pretensions  of  the  philosophers,  resolves  on  a  visit  to  the  stars,  for  the 
purpose  of  seeing  how  far  their  theories  are  correct.  By  the  mechanical 
aid  of  a  pair  of  wings  he  reaches  the  moon,  and  surveys  thence  the  miser- 
i  Smith,  I.  c.  2  Id.  ib. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  479 

able  passions  and  quarrels  of  men.  Hence  he  proceeds  to  Olympus,  and 
is  introduced  to  the  Thunderer  himself.  Here  he  is  witness  of  the  man 
ner  in  which  human  prayers  are  received  in  heaven.  They  ascend  by 
enormous  vent-holes,  and  become  audible  when  Jupiter  removes  the  cov 
ers.  Jupiter  himself  is  represented  as  a  partial  judge,  and  as  influenced 
by  the  largeness  of  the  rewards  promised  to  him.  At  the  end  he  pro 
nounces  judgment  against  the  philosophers,  and  threatens  in  four  days  to 
destroy  them  all.  Charon  is  a  very  elegant  dialogue,  but  of  a  graver  turn 
than  the  preceding.  Charon  visits  the  earth,  to  see  the  course  of  life 
there,  and  what  it  is  which  always  makes  men  weep  when  they  enter  his 
boat.  Mercury  acts  as  his  cicerone.  In  this  piece,  however,  Lucian  has 
not  been  very  scrupulous  about  chronology.  The  whole  is  a  picture  of 
the  smallness  of  mankind  when  viewed  from  a  philosophic  as  well  as  a 
physical  height.1 

Lucian's  rhetorical  pieces  were  no  doubt,  for  the  most  part,  the  first  pro 
ductions  of  his  pen  ;  for  we  have  already  seen  that  he  did  not  lay  aside 
that  profession  and  apply  himself  to  a  different  style  of  writing  till  he  had 
reached  the  age  of  forty.  Of  all  his  pieces  they  are  the  most  unimport 
ant,  and  betray  least  of  his  real  character  and  genius.  The  pieces,  again, 
which  entitle  Lucian  to  be  called  a  biographer,  are  rather  anecdotical  me 
moirs,  like  Xenophon's  Memorabilia,  than  regular  biographies.  Under  the 
head  of  Romances  may  be  classed  the  tale  entitled  Lucius,  or  the  Ass,  from 
which  Appuleius  is  thought  to  have  drawn  his  story  of  the  Golden  Ass. 
Under  this  same  head  may  be  ranked  the  Vera  Historic,  written  to  ridi 
cule  the  authors  of  extravagant  tales,  and  which  would  appear  to  have 
furnished  hints  to  Rabelais  and  Swift  in  modern  times,  not  only  from  the 
nature  and  extravagance  of  the  fiction,  but  from  the  lurking  satire.  We 
have  also  some  Poems  by  Lucian.  These  consist  of  two  mock  tragedies 
and  about  fifty  epigrams.3 

Lucian's  merits  as  a  writer  consist  in  his  knowledge  of  human  nature, 
which,  however,  he  generally  viewed  on  its  worst  side  ;  his  strong  com 
mon  sense  ;  the  fertility  of  his  invention  ;  the  raciness  of  his  humor ;  and 
the  simplicity  and  Attic  grace  of  his  diction.  His  knowledge  was  proba 
bly  not  very  profound,  and  it  may  be  suspected  that  he  was  not  always 
master  of  the  philosophy  which  he  attacked.  His  writings  have  a  more 
modern  air  than  those  of  any  other  classic  author ;  and  the  keenness  of 
his  wit,  the  richness  and  extravagance  of  his  humor,  the  fertility  and  live 
liness  of  his  fancy,  his  proneness  to  skepticism,  and  the  clearness  and 
simplicity  of  his  style,  present  us  with  a  kind  of  compound  between  Swift 
and  Voltaire.  There  was  abundance  to  justify  his  attacks  in  the  systems 
against  which  they  were  directed.  Yet  he  establishes  nothing  in  their 
stead.  His  aim  is  only  to  pull  down ;  to  spread  a  universal  skepticism. 
Nor  were  his  assaults  confined  to  religion  and  philosophy,  but  extended  to 
every  thing  old  and  venerated — the  poems  of  Homer  and  Hesiod,  and  the 
history  of  Herodotus.  Yet  writing,  as  he  did,  amid  the  doomed  idols  of 
an  absurd  superstition,  and  the  contradictory  tenets  of  an  almost  equally 
absurd  philosophy,  his  works  had  undoubtedly  a  beneficial  influence  on 
i  Smith,  1.  c.  2  Id.  ib. 


480  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

the  cause  of  truth.  That  they  were  indirectly  serviceable  to  Christianity, 
can  hardly  be  disputed ;  but  though  Lucian  is  generally  just  in  his  repre 
sentations  of  the  Christians,  we  may  be  sure  that  such  a  result  was  as 
far  from  his  wishes  as  his  thoughts. 

The  Editio  Princeps  of  Lucian  was  printed  at  Florence,  1496,  fol.  The  first  Aldine 
appeared  at  Venice,  1503,  fol.  This  edition,  printed  from  bad  MSS.,  and  very  incorrect, 
was  somewhat  improved  in  the  second  Aldine,  1502,  fol.,  but  is  still  inferior  to  the  Flor 
entine.  The  Aldine,  however,  served  as  the  basis  of  subsequent  editions  till  1615,  when 
Bourdelot  published  in  Paris  a  Greek  and  Latin  edition  in  folio,  the  text  corrected  from 
MSS.  and  the  Editio  Princeps.  This  was  repeated,  with  emendations,  in  the  Saumur 
edition,  1619.  Le  Ulerc's  edition,  2  vols.  8vo,  Amsterdam,  1687,  is  very  incorrect.  In 
1730  Hemsterhuis  began  to  print  his  excellent  edition,  but  dying  in  1736,  before  a  quar 
ter  01  it  had  been  finished,  the  editorship  was  assigned  to  J.  F.  Reitz,  and  the  book  was 
published  at  Amsterdam,  in  3  vols.  4to,  in  1743.  In  1746,  C.  C.  Reitz,  brother  of  the 
editor,  printed  at  Utrecht  an  Index,  or  Lexicon  Lucianeum,  in  one  volume  4to,  which, 
though  extensive,  is  not  complete.  The  edition  of  Hemsterhuis,  besides  his  own  notes, 
also  contains  those  of  Jensius,  Kuster,  Bos,  Vitringa,  Du  Soul,  Gesnerk  Reitz,  and  other 
commentators.  An  appendix  to  the  notes  of  Hemsterhuis,  taken  from  a  MS.  in  the  Ley- 
den  library,  was  published  at  that  place  by  Geel,  1824,  4to.  Hemsterhuis  corrected  the 
Latin  version  for  his  edition  as  far  as  the  De  Sacrificiis ;  and  of  the  remainder  a  new  trans 
lation  was  made  by  Gesner.  The  reprint  by  Schmidt,  Mittau,  1776-80,  8  vols.  8vo,  is  in 
correct.  The  Bipont  edition,  in  10  vols.  8vo,  1789-93,  is  an  accurate  and  elegant  reprint 
of  Hemsterhuis's  edition,  w\th  the  addition  of  collations  of  Paris  MSS.  ;  but  the  omission 
of  the  Greek  index  is  a  drawback  to  it.  A  good  edition,  though  disfigured  by  typograph 
ical  errors,  is  that  of  Lehmann,  Leipzig.  1821-31,  9  vols.  8vo.  There  is  also  a  very  good 
and  convenient  edition  of  the  text,  with  a  Latin  version,  by  W.  Dindorf,  forming  part 
of  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graeca,  Paris,  1840. 

VIII.  MAXIMUS  TYRius,1  a  native  of  Tyre,  a  Greek  sophist  and  rhetori 
cian,  and  also  a  Platonic  philosopher,  lived  during  the  reigns  of  the  An- 
tonines  and  of  Commodus.  Some  writers  suppose  that  he  was  one  of 
the  tutors  of  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus ;  but  it  is  more  probable  that  he  was 
a  different  person  from  Claudius  Maximus,  the  Stoic,  who  was  the  tutor 
of  that  emperor.  Maximus  Tyrius  appears  to  have  spent  the  greater 
part  of  his  life  in  Greece,  but  he  visited  Rome  once  or  twice.  The  time 
of  his  death  is  unknown.  There  are  extant  forty-one  Dissertations  (Ato- 
A.e£eis)  of  Maximus  Tyrius,  on  theological,  ethical,  and  other  philosophical 
subjects,  written  in  an  easy  and  pleasing  style,  but  not  characterized  by 
much  depth  of  thought.  Heinsius  thinks  that  the  author  arranged  them 
in  ten  Tetralogies,  or  sets  of  four  each,  according  to  the  subjects,  and  in 
one  of  his  notes  he  conjecturally  gives  what  he  regards  as  their  correct 
order.  The  merits  of  Maximus  Tyrius  have  been  variously  estimated. 
Reiske  speaks  of  him  as  a  tedious  and  affected  writer,  who  degraded  the 
most  elevated  and  important  subjects  by  his  trivial  and  puerile  mode  of 
treating  them.  But  Markland,  while  admitting  and  blaming  the  haste 
and  inaccuracy  of  Maximus,  praises  his  acuteness,  ability,  and  learning. 

The  Greek  text  was  first  printed  by  H.  Stephens,  Paris,  1557,  8vo,  accompanied,  but  in 
a  separate  volume,  by  the  version  of  Paccius.  The  edition  of  Heinsius,  from  a  MS.  in 
the  king's  library  at  Paris,  with  a  new  Latin  version,  and  notes  by  the  editor,  was 
printed  at  Leyden,  1607,  8vo,  and  again  in  1614,  and,  without  the  notes,  in  1630.  It  has 
been  reprinted  once  or  twice  since  then.  The  first  edition  of  Davies,  fellow  of  Queen's 
College,  Cambridge,  with  the  version  of  Heinsius,  and  short  notes,  was  published  at 
Cambridge,  1703,  8vo  ;  the  second  and  more  important  edition,  in  which  the  text  was 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Miogr.,  ».  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  481 

carefully  revised,  and  a  new  arrangement  of  the  Dissertations  was  adopted,  was  publish 
ed  after  the  editor's  death  by  Dr.  John  Ward,  the  Gresham  professor,  with  valuable  notes, 
by  Jeremiah  Markland,  London,  1740,  4to.  This  second  edition  of  Davies  was  reprinted, 
with  some  corrections  and  additional  notes,  by  Reiske,  2  vols.  8vo,  Leipzig,  1774-5. 

IX.  PHILOSTRATUS  ($iX6ffr paras)  FLAVIUS,*  a  celebrated  sophist  and 
rhetorician,  born  probably  in  Lemnos,  about  A.D.  182.  He  studied  and 
taught  at  Athens,  whence  he  is  usually  called  the  Athenian,  to  distinguish 
him  from  a  younger  namesake.  He  afterward  removed  to  Rome,  where 
we  find  him  a  member  of  the  circle  of  literary  men  whom  the  philosophic 
Julia  Domna,  the  wife  of  Severus,  had  drawn  around  her.  It  was  at  her 
desire  that  he  wrote  the  life  of  Apollonius  of  Tyana.  He  was  still  alive 
in  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  Philippus  (244-249).  The  following  works 
of  Philostratus  have  come  down  to  us :  1.  The  Life  of  Apollonius  of  Ty 
ana,  the  famous  impostor.  Many  of  the  wonders  which  Philostratus  re 
lates  in  connection  with  Apollonius  are  merely  clumsy  imitations  of  the 
Christian  miracles.  The  work  is  divided  into  eight  books.  2.  The  Lives 
of  the  Sophists  (Biot  2o0i<TT<S»),  in  two  books,  containing  the  history  of 
philosophers  who  had  the  character  of  being  sophists,  and  of  those  who 
were  really  sophists.  It  begins  with  the  life  of  Gorgias,  and  comes  down 
to  the  contemporaries  of  Philostratus,  in  the  reign  of  Philippus.  3.  He- 
roica,  or  Heroicus  ('Upwind,  'H/J&NKO'S),  in  the  form  of  a  dialogue,  and  giving 
an  account  of  the  heroes  engaged  in  the  Trojan  war.  4.  Imagines  (E/'/coV- 
es),  in  two  books,  containing  an  account  of  various  paintings.  This  is 
the  author's  most  pleasing  work,  exhibiting  great  richness  of  fancy,  power 
and  variety  of  delineation,  and  a  rich  exuberance  of  style.  5.  Epistola 
('EiriffTo\ai),  seventy-three  in  number,  chiefly  specimens  of  amatory  letters 

Of  the  collected  works  of  Philostratus  there  is,  1.  The  edition  of  Morellius,  Paris,  1608, 
containing  all  the  works  above  mentioned,  along  with  some  of  those  of  other  writers. 
This  edition  is  of  no  value.  2.  That  of  Olearius,  Leipzig,  1709,  2  vols.  fol.  Previous  to 
this  edition,  Bentley  and  others  had  contemplated  one.  Indeed,  Bentley  had  gone  so  far 
as  to  publish  a  specimen  sheet.  Unhappily,  the  design  was  not  executed  ;  but  he  freely 
communicated  to  Olearius  both  his  conjectural  criticisms  and  his  notes  of  various  read 
ings.  The  edition  is  a  very  beautiful  specimen  of  typography,  and,  in  spite  of  many 
faults,  and  the  accusation  that  the  editor  has  been  guilty  of  gross  plagiarism,  which  has 
been  repeatedly  brought  against  him,  is  very  valuable,  especially  for  its  exegetical  notes. 
3.  The  last  edition,  and,  critically,  by  far  the  best,  is  that  of  C.  L.  Kayser,  Zurich,  1844, 
4to.  It  contains  introductory  remarks  on  each  book,  the  Greek  text,  and  notes,  which 
are  principally  critical.  As  he  had  already  published  several  of  the  treatises  of  Philos 
tratus  separately,  the  notices  and  notes  are,  in  some  cases,  briefer  than  might  have  been 
desired.  Philostratus  seems  to  have  occupied  his  attention  for  years,  and  scholars  in 
various  parts  of  Europe  have  aided  him,  in  collecting  MSS.  Of  separate  editions,  we 
may  mention  Kayser's  elaborate  edition  of  the  Lives  of  the  Sopkists,  Heidelberg,  1838  ; 
Boissonade's  edition  of  the-  Heroica,  Paris,  1806 ;  and  Jacobs'  and  Welcker's  edition  of 
the  Imagines,  Leipzig,  1825. 

II.    RHETORICIANS. 

I.  DIONYSIUS  OF  HALicARNAssus.2  We  have  already  made  mention  of 
this  writer  when  treating  of  the  historical  productions  of  this  age.  It  now 
remains  to  notice  briefly  his  rhetorical  and  critical  works.  All  the  writings 
of  this  class  show  that  Dionysius  wras  not  only  a  rhetorician  of  the  first 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Bioffr.,  a.  v.  a  Id.  ib. 

X 


482  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

order,  but  also  a  most  excellent  critic,  in  the  highest  and  best  sense  of 
the  term.  They  abound  in  the  most  exquisite  remarks  and  criticisms  on 
the  works  of  the  classical  writers  of  Greece,  although  they  are,  at  the 
same  time,  not  without  their  faults,  among  which  we  may  mention  his 
hypercritical  severity.  But  we  have  to  remember  that  they  were  the 
productions  of  an  early  age,  in  which  the  want  of  a  sound  philosophy  and 
of  a  comprehensive  knowledge,  and  a  partiality  for  or  against  certain 
writers,  led  him  to  express  opinions  which,  at  a  maturer  age,  he  undoubt 
edly  regretted.  The  following  works  of  this  class  are  still  extant:  1. 
Te'xj/Tj  pr)TopiK-f],  Art  of  Rhetoric.  The  present  condition  of  this  work  is  by 
no  means  calculated  to  give  us  a  correct  idea  of  its  merits,  and  of  his 
views  on  the  subject  of  rhetoric.  It  consists  of  twelve,  or,  according  to 
another  division,  of  eleven  chapters,  which  have  no  internal  connection 
whatever,  and  have  the  appearance  of  being  put  together  merely  by  ac 
cident.  The  treatise,  therefore,  is  generally  looked  upon  as  a  collection 
of  rhetorical  essays  by  different  authors,  some  of  which  are  genuine  pro 
ductions  of  Dionysius,  who  is  expressly  stated  by  Quintilian  to  have  writ 
ten  a  manual  of  rhetoric.  2.  Uepl  o-wfleVews  'Oo^aTwy  (De  Compositione 
Verborum),  written  probably  in  the  first  year  or  years  of  his  residence  at 
Rome,  and,  at  all  events,  previous  to  any  of  the  other  works  still  extant. 
It  is,  however,  notwithstanding  this,  one  of  high  excellence.  In  it  the 
author  treats  of  oratorical  power,  and  of  the  combination  of  words,  ac 
cording  to  the  different  species  and  style  of  oratory.  3.  riepl 
Its  proper  title  appears  to  have  been  vrnyu/Tj^aTicr^ol  irep}  rfjs 
The  work,  as  a  whole,  is  lost,  and  what  we  possess  under  the  title  of  TUP 
apxaivv  Kpiffis  is  probably  nothing  but  a  sort  of  epitome,  containing  char 
acteristics  of  poets,  from  Homer  down  to  Euripides  ;  of  some  historians, 
such  as  Herodotus,  Thucydides,  Philistus,  Xenophon,  and  Theopompus ; 
and,  lastly,  of  some  philosophers  and  orators.  4.  riepl  T£>V  apxaiav  prjr6p- 
atv  inrofj.vt]/j.aTtff/j.oi,  containing  criticisms  on  the  most  eminent  Greek  ora 
tors  and  historians.  The  author  points  out  their  excellences  as  well  as 
defects,  with  a  view  to  promote  a  wise  imitation  of  the  classic  models, 
and  thus  to  preserve  a  pure  taste  in  those  branches  of  literature.  The 
work  originally  consisted  of  six  sections,  of  which  we  now  possess  only 
the  first  three,  on  Lysias,  Isocrates,  and  Isaeus.  The  other  sections  treat 
ed  of  Demosthenes,  Hyperides,  and  ^Eschines  ;  but  we  have  only  the  first 
part  of  the  fourth  section,  which  treats  of  the  oratorical  power  of  Demos 
thenes,  and  his  superiority  over  other  public  speakers.  5.  A  treatise  en 
titled  'ETriffTo\r)  Trpbs  'A/j.fjtaiov  Trp&Tf),  which  title,  however,  does  not  occur 
in  MSS.,  and  instead  of  Trpcorrj,  it  ought  to  be  called  ^iriarroX^  Sevrcpa.  This 
treatise  or  epistle,  in  which  the  author  shows  that  most  of  the  orations 
of  Demosthenes  had  been  delivered  before  Aristotle  wrote  his  Rhetoric, 
and  that,  consequently,  Demosthenes  had  derived  no  instruction  from 
Aristotle,  is  of  great  importance  for  the  history  and  criticism  of  the  works 
of  Demosthenes.  6.  'ETTUTTO\})  irpbs  Tvdiov  no^iov,  written  with  a  view 
to  justify  the  unfavorable  opinion  which  Dionysius  had  expressed  upon 
Plato,  and  which  Pompeius  had  censured.  The  latter  part  of  this  treatise 
is  much  mutilated,  and  did  not,  perhaps,  originally  belong  to  it.  7.  Utpl 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  483 

TOV  0ouKv5(Sov  xaPaKTfiPosi  &c-»  written  by  Dionysius,  at  the  request  of  his 
friend  ^Elius  Tubero,  for  the  purpose  of  explaining  more  minutely  what 
he  had  written  on  Thucydides.  8.  Ilept  T&V  TQV  0ouKv5i5ou  iSLUfj.d.Twj/.  9. 
,  a  Ver7  valuable  treatise  on  the  life  and  orations  of  Dinarchus.1 

ij  was  edited,  with  very  valuable  prolegomena  and  notes,  by  Schott, 
Leipzig,  1804,  8vo.  Of  the  treatise  rrepl  arvv6e<re<a$  bvofj-armv,  there  are  two  very  good 
editions,  one  by  Schaefer,  Leipzig,  1809,  8vo,  and  the  other  by  Goller,  Jena,  1815,  8vo, 
in  which  the  text  is  considerably  improved  from  MSS.  The  epitome,  nepl  ^i/m^creio?, 
is  printed  separately  in  Frotscher's  edition  of  the  tenth  book  of  Quintilian,  Leipzig,  1826, 
p.  271,  seqq.  The  three  treatises  mentioned  under  Nos.  6,  7,  and  8,  are  given  in  a  very 
good  edition  by  Kriiger,  Halle,  1823,  8vo.  The  editions  of  the  entire  works  have  al 
ready  been  given  on  page  455. 

II.  HERMOGENES  ('Eftuoyej/Tjs)2  of  Tarsus,  one  of  the  most  celebrated  of 
the  Greek  rhetoricians,  lived  in  the  reign  of  the  Emperor  M.  Aurelius 
Antoninus,  A.D.  161-180.  He  bore  the  surname  of  IUOTTJP,  that  is,  the 
scratcher  or  polisher,  either  with  reference  to  his  vehement  tempera 
ment,  or  to  the  great  polish  which  he  strongly  recommended  as  one  of 
the  principal  requisites  in  a  written  composition.  He  was,  according  to 
all  accounts,  a  man  endowed  with  extraordinary  talents,  for  at  the  age 
of  fifteen  he  had  already  acquired  so  great  a  reputation  as  an  orator,  that 
the  Emperor  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus  desired  to  hear  him,  and  admired 
and  richly  rewarded  him  for  his  wonderful  ability.  Shortly  after  this,  he 
was  appointed  public  teacher  of  rhetoric ;  and,  at  the  age  of  seventeen,  he 
began  his  career  as  a  writer,  which  unfortunately  did  not  last  long,  for  at 
the  age  of  twenty-five  he  fell  into  a  mental  debility,  which  rendered  him 
entirely  unfit  for  farther  literary  and  intellectual  occupation,  and  of  which 
he  never  got  rid,  although  he  lived  to  an  advanced  age ;  so  that  he  was  a 
man  in  the  time  of  his  youth,  and  a  child  during  his  maturer  years.  After 
his  death,  his  heart  is  said  to  have  been  found  covered  with  hair.3  If  we 
may  judge  from  what  Hermogenes  did  at  so  early  an  age,  there  can  be 
little  doubt  that  he  would  have  far  excelled  all  other  Greek  rhetoricians, 
if  he  had  remained  in  the  full  possession  of  his  mental  powers.  His 
works,  five  in  number,  which  are  still  extant,  form  together  a  complete 
system  of  rhetoric,  and  were  for  a  long  time  used  in  all  the  rhetorical 
schools  as  manuals.  Many  distinguished  rhetoricians  and  grammarians 
wrote  commentaries  upon  them,  some  of  which  are  still  extant ;  many, 
also,  made  abridgments  of  the  works  of  Hermogenes  for  the  use  of  schools, 
and  the  abridgment  of  Aphthonius  at  length  supplanted  the  original  in 
most  schools. 

The  works  of  Hermogenes  are  as  follows :  1.  Texfn  p-nroputT}  irfpl  T&V 
ffrdffeuv,  composed  by  the  author  at  the  age  of  eighteen.  The  work  treats 
of  the  points  and  questions  which  an  orator,  in  civil  cases,  has  to  take 
into  his  consideration.  It  examines  every  one  separately,  and  thence  de 
duces  the  rules  which  a  speaker  has  to  observe.  The  work  is  a  very 
useful  guide  for  those  who  prepare  themselves  for  speaking  in  courts  of 
justice.  2.  Uepl  evpeVcws  (D«  Inventione),  in  four  books,  containing  in 
structions  about  the  proper  composition  of  an  oration.  Every  point  which 
Hermogenes  here  discusses  is  illustrated,  as  in  the  preceding  work,  by 
*  Smith,  I.  c.  a  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr..  9.  v.  3  Philostr.,  Vit.  Soph.,  ii.,  7  ,  Evdoc.,  p.  165. 


484  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

examples  taken  from  the  Attic  orators,  which  greatly  enhances  the  clear 
ness  and  utility  of  the  treatise.  3.  Ilepl  t'5e<w/  (De  Formis  Oratonis),  in 
two  books,  treating  of  the  forms  of  oratorical  style,  and  their  subdivis 
ions.  4.  Tlepl  fisdoSov  Seij/^TTjros  (De  apto  ct  solerti  genere  dicendi  Metho- 
dus),  forming  a  sort  of  appendix  to  the  preceding  work,  and  containing 
suggestions  for  the  proper  application  of  the  rules  there  laid  down.  5. 
Upoyv/jLvdo-^ara,  that  is,  practical  instructions  in  oratory,  according  to 
given  models.  A  very  convenient  abridgment  of  this  work  was  made  by 
Aphthonius,  in  consequence  of  which  the  original  fell  into  oblivion.  But 
its  great  reputation  in  antiquity  is  attested  by  the  fact,  that  the  learned 
grammarian  Priscian  made  a  Latin  translation  of  it,  with  some  additions 
of  his  own,  under  the  title  of  Praexercitamenta  Rhetorica  ex  Hcrmogene. 
There  were  some  other  works  of  Hermogenes,  but  they  are  now  lost. 
All  his  extant  productions  bear  strong  marks  of  the  youthful  age  of  the 
author ;  for  it  is  clear  that  his  judgment  and  his  opinions  have  not  yet 
become  settled.  He  has  not  the  consciousness  of  a  man  of  long  experi 
ence,  and  his  style  is  rather  diffuse,  but  always  clear  and  unaffected.  He 
is  moderate  in  his  judgment  and  censure  of  other  rhetoricians,  has  a  cor 
rect  appreciation  of  the  merits  of  the  earlier  Greek  orators,  and  every 
where  shows  symptoms  of  a  most  careful  study  of  the  ancients.  These 
excellences,  which  at  once  place  him  on  a  level  with  the  most  distin 
guished  teachers  of  rhetoric,  are  reasons  enough  to  make  us  regret  that 
his  brilliant  career  was  cut  off  so  early  and  so  fatally. 

The  Te'xvTj  prjTopucrj  is  printed  in  the  Rhetores  of  Aldus,  vol.  i.,  p.  1,  seqq.  It  was  also 
edited  separately  at  Paris,  1530  and  1538,  4to,  ex  off.  Wechelii;  by  Caselius,  Rostock, 
1583,  8vo  ;  by  Sturm,  Strasburg,  1570,  with  a  Latin  translation  and  scholia  ;  by  Lauren- 
tius,  Geneva,  1614,  8vo;  and  by  Corales,  Venice,  1799,  4to.  The  extant  scholia  are 
printed  in  Walz's  Rhetores  Graeci,  vols.  iv.,  v.,  vi.,  and  vii.  The  treatise  De  Inventione  is 
printed  in  the  Rhetores  of  Aldus,  in  the  editions  of  Laurentius,  Wechel,  and  Sturm,  but 
best  in  Walz's  Rhetores  Graeci,  vol.  iii.  We  have  also  scholia  on  the  work  by  an  anony 
mous  commentator,  in  Aldus's  Rhetores,  vol.  ii.,  p.  352,  seqq.  The  treatise  De  Formis 
Oratoriis  is  given  in  the  editions  of  Aldus  and  Lawrentius,  and  separately  at  Paris,  1531, 
4to ;  and  with  a  Latin  translation  and  notes,  by  Sturm,  Strasburg,  1571,  8vo.  The  best 
edition,  however,  is  that  in  Walz's  Rhetores  Graci,  vol.  iii.,  who  has  also  published  the 
Greek  commentaries  by  Syrianus  and  Johannes  Siceliota,  vols.  vi.  and  vii.  The  treatise 
De  apto  et  solerti  genere  dicendi  Methodus  is  printed  in  the  editions  of  Aldus.  Wechel, 
Laurentius,  and  Sturm,  but  best  in  Walz's  Rhetores  Grasci,  vol.  iii.,  who  has  also  pub 
lished  the  Greek  commentaries  by  Gregorius  Corinthius,  vol.  vii.  Priscian's  Latin  ver 
sion  of  the  npo-yv/xcaoYtaTa.  was  for  a  long  time  the  only  edition  of  the  work,  until  the 
Greek  original  was  found  in  a  MS.  at  Turin,  from  which  it  was  published  by  lleeren  in 
the  Biblioth.fiir  alte  Lit.  und  Kunst,  parts  viii.  and  ix.,  Gottingen,  1791,  and  by  Ward  in 
the  Classical  Journal,  vols.  v.-viii.  A  separate  edition  was  published  by  Veesenmeyer, 
Niirnberg,  1812,  8vo.  It  is  also  contained  in  Krehl's  edition  of  Priscian,  vol.  ii.,  p.  419, 
seqq.,  but  best  in  Walz's  Rhetores  Greed,  vol.  i.,  p.  9,  seqq.,  who  has  collated  six  other 
MSS.  besides  the  Turin  one. 

III.  APHTHONIUS  ('A^floVtos),1  of  Antioch,  a  Greek  rhetorician  who  lived 
about  A.D.  315,  but  of  whose  life  nothing  is  known.  He  is  the  author  of 
an  elementary  introduction  to  the  study  of  rhetoric,  and  of  a  number  of 
fables  in  the  style  of  those  of  ^Esop.  The  work  on  rhetoric  was  con 
structed  on  the  basis  of  the  Progymnasmata  of  Hermogenes,  and  became 
so  popular  that  it  was  used  as  the  common  school-book  in  this  branch  of 
i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  t.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  485 

education  for  several  centuries.  On  the  revival  of  letters  it  recovered 
its  ancient  popularity,  and  during  the  sixteenth  arid  seventeenth  centu 
ries  was  used  every  where,  but  more  especially  in  Germany,  as  the  text 
book  for  rhetoric.  The  number  of  editions  and  translations  which  were 
published  during  that  period  is  greater  than  that  of  any  other  ancient 
writer.  The  last  and  best  edition  is  that  in  Walz's  collection  of  the 
Rhetores  Graci,  vol.  i.,  p.  54,  seqq.  The  ^Esopic  fables  of  Aphthonius, 
which  are  inferior  in  merit  to  those  of  ^Esop,  are  printed  in  Scobarius's 
edition  of  the  Progymnasmata,  and  also  in  the  Paris  edition  of  1623. 
De  Furia's  edition  of  the  Fables  of  ^Esop  contains  twenty-three  of  those 
of  Aphthonius. 

IV  LONGINUS  DIONYSIUS  CASSIUS  (Aiovfotos  Kdffcrios  Aoyyivos),1  a  very 
distinguished  rhetorician  and  philosopher  of  the  third  century  of  our  era. 
His  original  name  seems  to  have  been  Dionysius,  but  either  because  he 
entered  into  the  relation  of  client  to  some  Cassius  Longinus,  or  because 
his  ancestors  had  received  the  Roman  franchise,  through  the  influence  of 
some  Cassius  Longinus,  he  bore  the  name  of  Dionysius  Longinus,  Cassius 
Longinus,  or  in  the  complete  form  given  at  the  head  of  this  article.  He 
was  born  about  A.D.  213,  and  was  put  to  death  in  A.D.  273,  at  the  age 
of  sixty.  His  native  place  is  uncertain.  Some  say  that  he  was  born  at 
Palmyra,  while  others  call  him  a  Syrian,  or  a  native  of  Emesa.  There 
is  more  ground,  however,  for  believing  that  he  was  born  at  Athens,  as  he 
was  brought  up  by  his  uncle  Fronto,  who  taught  rhetoric  at  the  latter  place. 
Longinus  subsequently  visited  many  countries,  and  became  acquainted 
with  all  the  illustrious  philosophers  of  his  age,  such  as  Ammonius  Saccas  ; 
Origen,  the  disciple  of  Ammonius,  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  Christian 
writer ;  Plotinus,  and  Amelius.  He  was  a  pupil  of  the  two  former,  and 
was  an  adherent  of  the  Platonic  philosophy ;  but  instead  of  following 
blindly  the  system  of  Ammonius,  he  went  to  the  fountain-head,  and  made 
himself  thoroughly  familiar  with  the  works  of  Plato.  On  his  return  to 
Athens  he  opened  a  school,  which  was  attended  by  numerous  pupils, 
among  whom  the  most  celebrated  was  Porphyry.  At  Athens  he  seems 
to  have  lectured  on  philosophy  and  criticism  as  well  as  on  rhetoric  and 
grammar,  and  the  extent  of  his  information  was  so  great,  that  Eunapius 
calls  him  "  a  living  library"  and  "  a  walking  museum."  But  his  knowl 
edge  was  not  a  dead  encumbrance  to  his  mind,  for  the  power  for  which 
he  was  most  celebrated  was  his  critical  skill,  and  this  was  indeed  so 
great,  that  the  expression  Kara  AoT^ij/oj/  ttpiveiv  became  synonymous  with 
"  tb  judge  correctly."2 

After  having  spent  a  considerable  part  of  his  life  at  Athens,  and  com 
posed  the  best  of  his  works,  he  went  to  the  East,  either  for  the  purpose 
of  seeing  his  friends  at  Emesa,  as  some  think  who  make  this  to  have 
been  his  native  place,  or  with  some  other  view.  It  seems  to  have  been 
on  this  occasion  that  he  became  known  to  Zenobia,  queen  of  Palmyra, 
who,  being  a  woman  of  great  talent,  and  fond  of  letters  and  the  arts, 
made  him  her  teacher  in  Greek  literature.  On  the  death  of  her  husband 
Qdenathus,  Longinus  became  her  principal  adviser,  and  it  was  mainly 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  t>.  2  Hieron.,  Epist.,  95. 


486  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

through  his  influence  that  she  threw  off  her  allegiance  to  the  Roman  em 
pire.  On  her  capture  by  Aurelian  in  A.D.  273,  Zenobia  threw  all  the 
blame  upon  her  advisers,  and  Longinus  was  in  consequence  put  to  death 
by  that  emperor.1 

Longinus  was  unquestionably  by  far  the  greatest  philosopher  of  the 
time,  and  stands  forth  so  distinct  and  solitary  in  that  age  of  mystic  and 
fanciful  quibblers,  that  it  is  impossible  not  to  recognize  in  him  a  man  of 
excellent  sense,  sound  and  independent  judgment,  and  extensive  knowl 
edge.  He  had  thoroughly  imbibed  the  spirit  of  Plato  and  Demosthenes, 
from  whom  he  derived  not  only  that  intellectual  culture  which  distin 
guished  him  above  all  others,  but  also  an  ardent  love  of  liberty,  and  a 
great  frankness  both  in  expressing  his  own  opinions  and  exposing  the 
faults  and  errors  of  others.  His  work  On  the  Sublime  (Tlepl  "ftyovs),  a 
great  part  of  which  is  still  extant,  surpasses  in  oratorical  power  every 
thing  written  after  the  time  of  the  Greek  orators.  There  is  scarcely  any 
work  in  the  range  of  ancient  literature  which,  independent  of  its  excel 
lence  of  style,  contains  so  many  exquisite  remarks  upon  oratory,  poetry, 
and  good  taste  in  general.  It  unfortunately  contains  many  lacunae,  which 
can  not  be  filled  up,  since  all  the  MSS.  extant  are  only  copies  of  the  one 
which  is  preserved  at  Paris.  Notwithstanding  his  manifold  avocations, 
Longinus  composed  a  great  number  of  works,  which  appear  to  have  been 
held  in  the  highest  estimation.  They  have  all  perished,  however,  and  all 
that  has  come  down  to  us  consists  of  the  treatise  Tlepl  "Ttyovs,  and  a  num 
ber  of  fragments,  which  have  been  preserved  as  quotations  in  the  works 
of  contemporary  and  later  writers. 

The  first  edition  of  the  treatise  jrepl  ityov?  is  that  of  Robortello,  Basle,  1554, 4to.  The 
next  important  edition  is  that  of  Portus,  Geneva,  1569,  8vo,  which  forms  the  basis  of  all 
subsequent  ones  until  the  time  of  Tollius.  We  may,  however,  mention  those  of  Lang- 
baene,  Oxford,  1636,  1638,  and  1650,  8vo,  and  of  Faber,  Saumur,  1663,  8vo.  In  1694, 
there  appeared  the  edition  of  Tollius,  with  notes  and  Latin  translation,  Utrecht,  4to.  It 
was  followed  in  the  editions  of  Hudson,  Oxford,  1710,  1718,  1730,  8vo  ;  Pearce,  London, 
1724,  4to,  often  reprinted  in  8vo  ;  and  Morus,  Leipzig,  1769-73,  8vo.  A  collection  of  all 
that  is  extant  of  Longinus  was  published  by  Toup,  with  notes  and  emendations  by 
Ruhnken,  of  which  three  editions  were  published  at  Oxford,  1778,  1789,  and  1806,  8vo. 
The  most  recent  editions  are  those  of  Weiske,  Leipzig,  1809,  8vo,  and  of  Egger,  forming 
vol.  i.  of  the  Scriptorum  Grose,  nova  Collectio,  Paris,  1837,  16mo. 

V.  APSINES  ('AiJ<u/77s)2  of  Gadara,  in  Phoenicia,  a  rhetorician  and  sophist, 
who  nourished  in  the  reign  of  Maximinus,  about  A.D.  235.  He  studied 
at  Smyrna,  under  Heraclides  the  Lycian,  and  afterward  at  Nicomedia, 
under  Basilicus.  He  subsequently  taught  rhetoric  at  Athens,  and  dis 
tinguished  himself  so  much  that  he  was  honored  with  the  consular  dig 
nity.  He  was  a  friend  of  Philostratus,3  who  praises  the  strength  and 
fidelity  of  his  memory,  but  is  afraid  to  say  more  for  fear  of  being  sus 
pected  of  flattery  or  partiality.  We  still  possess  two  rhetorical  works  of 
Apsines :  1.  Tlcpl  T£>V  fj.fpa>v  rov  TTO\ITIKOV  \6yov  r^xwfi  which  was  first 
printed  by  Aldus  in  his  Rhctorcs  Graci,  under  the  incorrect  title  Te'x^ 
prjToptK))  TTfpl  vpooifdwv,  as  it  is  called  by  the  scholiast  on  Hermogenes. 
This  work,  however,  is  only  a  part  of  a  greater  work,  and  is  so  much  inter 
polated  that  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  form  a  correct  notion  of  it.  A  con- 

1  Zosimus,  i.,  56.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Vit.  Soph.,  ii.,  33. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  487 

siderable  portion  of  it  was  discovered  by  Ruhnken  to  belong  to  a  work 
of  Longinus  on  rhetoric,  which  is  now  lost,  and  this  portion  has  conse 
quently  been  omitted  in  the  new  edition  of  Walz,  in  his  Rhetores  Greed 
(vol.  ix.,  p.  465,  seqq.).  2.  Ilepi  TWV  fffx^nafnff^vwv  Trpoft\ij/j.aT(i>y,  of  lit 
tle  importance,  and  very  short.  It  is  printed  in  Aldus's  Rhetores  Graci, 
p.  727,  seqq.,  and  in  Walz,  Rhet.  Grac.,  vol.  ix.,  p.  534,  scqq. 

III.     WRITERS     OF     WORKS     OF    FICTION.1 

I.  The  principal  works  of  fiction  prior  to  the  time  of  Alexander  the 
Great  appear  to  have  been  what  were  termed  the  "Milesian  Tales" 
(MiATjcna/ca,  or  MtArjam/cot  \6yoi).     There  is  little  known  of  them,  except 
that  they  were  not  of  a  very  moral  tendency,  and  were  written  by  an  in 
dividual  named  Aristides.    They  were  in  prose,  and  extended  to  six  books 
at  least.8     They  were  translated  into  Latin  by  Sisenna,  the  Roman  an 
nalist,  a  contemporary  of  Sulla,  and  seem  to  have  become  popular  with 
the  Romans.    Aristides  is  regarded,  in  fact,  as  the  inventor  of  the  Greek 
romance.     His  age  and  country  are  unknown,  but  he  was  probably  a 
native  of  Miletus. 

II.  The  more  frequent  intercourse,  however,  which  the  conquests  of 
Alexander  introduced  between  the  Greek  and  Asiatic  nations,  opened  at 
once  all  the  sources  of  fiction.     CLEARcnus,3  who  was  a  disciple  of  Aris 
totle,  and  who  wrote  a  history  of  fictitious  love  adventures,  seems  to  have 
been  the  first  author  who  gained  any  celebrity  by  this  species  of  com 
position. 

III.  Some  years  after  the  composition  of  the  fictitious  histories  of 
Clearchus,  ANTONIUS  DIOGENES*  wrote  a  more  perfect  romance  than  had 
hitherto  appeared,  founded  on  the  wandering  adventures  and  the  loves 
of  Dinias  and  Dercyllis,  and  entitled  Ta  inrep  QovXyv  fato-rct,  or  "  The  in 
credible  things  beyond  Thule."     This  island  was  not,  according  to  Dio 
genes,  the  most  distant  one  of  the  globe,  as  he  talks  of  several  beyond  it. 
Thule  is  but  a  single  station  for  his  adventurers,  and  many  of  the  most 
incredible  things  are  beheld  in  other  quarters  of  the  world.    The  idea  of 
the  work  is  said  to  have  been  taken  from  the  Odyssey,  and,  in  fact,  many 
of  the  incidents  seem  to  have  been  borrowed  from  that  poem.    The  work 
of  Diogenes  was  in  twenty-four  books,  and  \vas  written  in  the  form  of  a 
dialogue.     It  is  highly  praised  by  Photius  for  the  clearness  and  graceful 
ness  of  its  descriptions.     The  epitome  preserved  by  Photius  is  printed 
also  in  the  Corpus  Eroticorum  Gracorum,  vol.  i.,  edited  by  Passow,  Leip 
zig,  1824,  8vo. 

IV.  After  the  composition  of  the  Dinias  and  Dercyllis  of  Diogenes,  a 
considerable  period  seems  to  have  elapsed  without  the  production  of  any 
fictitious  narrative  deserving  the  appellation  of  a  romance.     Lucius,  of 
Patrae,5  is  the  next  writer  of  fiction  that  claims  our  attention.     The  pe 
riod,  however,  when  he  flourished  is  uncertain.     He  wrote  accounts  of 
magical  transformations,  Mera/j.op(f>(!!>(rf(>}v  \6yoi  Sidtpopoi,  Metamorphoseon 
Libri  Diversi,  which  are  now  lost,  but  were  extant  in  the  time  of  Photius, 


1  Dunlop,  History  of  Fiction.  .        2  Harpocrat.,  s.  v. 

3  Athen.,  xii.,  p.  553,  F.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s/v.  «  Id.  ib. 


488  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

who  has  described  them.  His  style  was  perspicuous  and  pure,  but  his 
works  were  crowded  with  marvels  ;  and,  according  to  Photius,  he  related 
with  perfect  gravity  and  good  faith  the  transformation  of  men  into  brutes, 
and  brutes  into  men.  Some  parts  of  his  works  bore  so  close  a  resem 
blance  to  the  Lucius  sive  Asinus  of  Lucian,  that  Photius  thought  he  had 
either  borrowed  from  that  writer,  or,  as  was  more  likely,  Lucian  had 
borrowed  from  him.  The  latter  alternative  appears  to  have  been  the 
true  one. 

V.  Subsequently  IAMBLICHUS,*  the  Syrian,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  the 
Emperor  Trajan,  wrote  his  Babylonica  (RafrvXwiKa.).     It  contained  the 
story  of  two  lovers,  Sinonis  and  Rhodanes,  and  was  in  thirty-nine  books, 
according  to  Suidas ;  but  Photius,  who  gives  an  epitome  of  the  work, 
mentions  only  seventeen.    A  perfect  copy  of  the  work  in  MS.  existed 
down  to  the  year  1671,  when  it  was  destroyed  by  fire.    A  few  fragments 
only  are  still  extant,  and  a  new  one  of  some  length  has  recently  been 
discovered  by  Mai  (Nov.  Collect.  Script.  Vet.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  349,  seqq.).     The 
epitome  of  Photius  and  the  fragments  are  given  in  Passow's  Corpus  Ero- 
ticorum,  vol.  i. 

VI.  After  lamblichus  we  may  mention  XENOPHON,  the  Ephesian*     His 
age,  however,  is  altogether  uncertain.     Locella  assigns  him  to  the  time 
of  the  Antonines.     Peerlkamp,  on  the  contrary,  regards  him  as  the  oldest 
of  the  Greek  romance  writers,  and  thinks  that  he  has  discovered  in  other 
writers  of  this  class  traces  of  an  imitation  of  Xenophon.     He  also  main 
tains  that  Xenophon  was  not  the  real  name  of  the  author,  and  that,  with 
the  exception  of  Heliodorus,  no  Greek  romance  writer  published  his  pro 
ductions  under  his  real  name.     Xenophon's  work  is  entitled  Ephesiaca, 
or  the  Loves  of  Anthia  and  Abrocomes  ('E^eo-mKa,  TO,  KOTO  'Aveiav  KOI 
'AjSpo/co/iTjj/).     The  style  of  the  work  is  simple,  and  the  story  is  conducted 
without  confusion,  notwithstanding  the  number  of  personages  introduced. 
The  adventures,  however,  are  of  a  very  improbable  kind.     Suidas  is  the 
only  ancient  writer  who  mentions  Xenophon.     There  is  but  a  single  man 
uscript  of  the  work  known,  which  is  in  the  monastery  of  the  Monte  Cas- 
sino.     There  are  also  seven  epistles  attributed  to  Xenophon,  among  the 
forty-one  so-called  Socratic  epistles ;   but  the  same  remark  applies  to 
them  as  to  most  of  the  Greek  literary  remains  of  that  class ;  they  are 
mere  rhetorical  essays. 

The  early  editions  of  Xenophon  Ephesius  are  of  very  little  value.  A  very  excellent 
and  carefully  prepared  edition,  by  Baron  de  Locella,  appeared  at  Vienna,  1796.  He  pro 
cured  a  fresh  collation  of  the  manuscript,  and  availed  himself  of  the  critical  remarks  of 
Hemsterhuis,  D'Abresch,  and  D'Orville,  and  the  labors  of  Bast,  who  had  made  prepara 
tions  for  editing  the  work.  Locella  also  prepared  a  new  translation  and  a  commentary. 
The  Ephesiaca  was  reprinted  by  Mitschertich,  in  his  Scriptores  Erotici  Graeci,  vol.  iv., 
Biponti  (Deuxponts),  1794.  Another  good  edition  is  that  of  Peerlkamp,  Harlem,  1818. 
The  most  recent  edition  is  that  of  Passow,  Leipzig,  1833,  in  the  Corpus  Scriptomrn  Ero- 
ticorurn  GraKcorwn. 

VII.  We  may  conclude  the  present  head  with  the  subject  of  Epistles. 
The  writers  who  pursued  this  species  of  writing  have  nearly  all  the  com 
mon  fault  of  running  too  much  after  ornaments  of  style  and  Attic  forms 

»  Phot.,  Bibl.  Cod.,  166.  a  Smtfft,  Diet.  J3»gr.,  s.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD. 


489 


of  expression.  The  most  eminent  among  these  epistolographers,  and 
the  one  most  free  from  these  faults,  was  ALCIPHRON. *  Respecting  his 
life,  or  the  age  in  which  he  lived,  we  possess  no  direct  information  what 
soever.  Some  of  the  earlier  critics,  as  La  Croze  and  J.  C.  Wolf,  placed 
him,  without  any  plausible  reason,  in  the  fifth  century  of  our  era.  Berg- 
ler,  and  others  who  followed  him,  placed  Alciphron  in  the  period  between 
Lucian  and  Aristaenetus,  that  is,  between  A.D.  170  and  350,  while  others, 
again,  assign  to  him  a  date  even  earlier  than  the  time  of  Lucian.  The 
only  circumstance  that  suggests  any  thing  respecting  his  age  is  the  fact 
that,  among  the  letters  of  Aristaenetus,  there  are  two  (i.,  5  and  22)  be 
tween  Lucian  and  Alciphron ;  now  as  Aristaenetus  is  nowhere  guilty  of 
any  great  historical  inaccuracy,  we  may  safely  infer  that  Alciphron  was 
a  contemporary  of  Lucian. 

We  possess,  under  the  name  of  Alciphron,  116  fictitious  letters,  in  three 
books,  the  object  of  which  is  to  delineate  the  characters  of  certain  classes 
of  men,  by  introducing  them  as  expressing  their  peculiar  sentiments  and 
opinions  upon  subjects  with  which  they  were  familiar.  The  classes  of 
persons  which  Alciphron  chose  for  this  purpose  are  fishermen,  country 
people,  parasites,  and  hetaerae.  All  are  made  to  express  their  sentiments 
in  the  most  graceful  and  elegant  language,  even  where  the  subjects  are 
of  a  low  or  immoral  kind.  The  characters  are  thus  somewhat  raised 
above  their  ordinary  standard,  without  any  great  violation  of  the  truth  of 
reality.  The  form  of  these  letters  is  exquisitely  beautiful,  and  the  lan 
guage  is  the  pure  Attic  dialect,  such  as  it  was  spoken  in  the  best  times 
in  familiar  but  refined  conversation  at  Athens.  The  scene  from  which 
the  letters  are  dated  is,  with  a  few  exceptions,  Athens  and  its  vicinity ; 
and  the  time,  wherever  it  is  discernible,  is  the  period  after  the  reign  of 
Alexander  the  Great.  The  new  Attic  comedy  was  the  principal  source 
from  which  the  author  derived  his  information  respecting  the  characters 
and  manners  which  he  describes,  and  for  this  reason  these  letters  con 
tain  much  valuable  information  about  the  private  life  of  the  Athenians  of 
that  time. 

The  first  edition  of  Alciphron's  Letters  is  that  of  Aldus,  in  his  Collection  of  the  Greek 
Epistolographers,  Venice,  1499,  4to.  This  edition,  however,  contains  only  those  letters 
which,  in  more  modern  editions,  form  the  first  two  books.  Seventy-two  new  letters 
were  added  from  a  Vienna  and  a  Vatican  MS.  by  Bergler,  in  his  edition,  Leipzig,  1715, 
8vo,  with  notes  and  a  Latin  translation.  These  seventy-two  epistles  form  the  third 
book  in  Bergler's  edition.  Wagner  subsequently  published  his  edition,  Leipzig,  1798,  2 
vols.  8vo,  containing,  besides  the  notes  of  Bergler,  two  new  letters  entire,  and  frag 
ments  of  five  others.  One  long  letter,  which  has  not  yet  been  published  entire,  exists 
in  several  Paris  MSS. 

IV.    GRAMMARIANS,    LEXICOGRAPHERS,    AND     SHOLIASTS. 

I.  During  the  period  which  we  are  considering,  the  term  Grammar 
(rpaju^crn/dj)  comprised  all  that  we  now  embrace  under  the  head  of  philo 
logical  erudition,  namely,  the  study  of  language  along  with  that  of  my 
thology  and  antiquities.  The  individuals  who  devoted  themselves  to 
these  pursuits  were  called  by  the  honorary  appellation  of 
1  Smith,  Diet,  Biagr.,  s,  v. 


490  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

while  they  who  taught  merely  the  elements  of  language,  or  what  we 
would  term  grammar,  were  termed  rpa/j./j-ana-Tal,  and  their  art  or  profes 
sion  Grammatistice  (Tpa/j./ji.aTurTiK'f)).1 

II.  Alexandrea  continued  to  be  the  chief  seat  of  this  species  of  erudi 
tion,  and  the  emperors  founded  various  establishments  in  it  for  the  pur 
pose  of  promoting  still  more  this  branch  of  literary  culture,  as,  for  instance, 
the  Museum  Claudium.     The  difficulty,  however,  of  procuring  copies  of 
works  in  an  age  when  printing  was  as  yet  unknown,  introduced  a  custom 
attended  by  injurious  consequences  to  literature,  that,  namely,  of  abridg 
ing  or  making  selections  from  larger  works,  and  which  often  was  the 
causg  of  the  neglect  and  eventual  loss  of  the  originals,  a  loss  for  which 
these  abridgments  and  selections,  for  the  most  part  meagre  and  incom 
plete  in  their  nature,  could  but  ill  compensate.2 

III.  The  most  useful  productions  of  this  age  were  the  Lexicons.     The 
grammarians  called  by  the  name  of  A6'£eis  those  words  which  were  re 
markable  for  any  peculiarity  of  signification  :  those,  again,  which  had  be 
come  obsolete  or  obscure,  or  which  were  derived  from  a  foreign  idiom,  or 
were  removed  from  common  phraseology  by  some  dialectic  variety,  they 
termed  yXwffcrai.     Hence  the  different  kinds  of  vocabulary  were  called 
Lexicons  or  Glossaries,  of  which  the  former  is,  strictly  speaking,  a  more 
comprehensive  title  than  the  latter.8 

IV.  After  the  decline  of  Grecian  liberty  and  language,  it  was  natural 
that  many  words  and  phrases  should  become  obsolete,  which  had  been 
current  in  the  better  ages  of  Attic  art  and  eloquence.     These  were  col 
lected  and  explained  by  the  grammarians  under  the  above-mentioned  ti 
tles  of  Ae|ets  and  T\u>ffffai.     There  were  TXuxrffai  larpiKai^  vo/j.iKai 

Kal,  tyiXovofyiKoi,  &€o\oyiKai,  and  FAcDo'o'at  fiapfiapiKai,  2KU0i/ccu, 
and  the  like.  There  were  Homeric  lexicons  even  at  an  early  age.  One 
certainly  existed  much  anterior  to  that  of  Apollonius,  which  last  has 
come  down  to  us.  Didymus,  as  we  have  already  remarked,  compiled  a 
species  of  tragic  lexicon  in  the  age  previous  to  the  present ;  Theon,  who 
wrote  scholia  on  Aratus  and  Apollonius  Rhodius,  a  comic  lexicon.  Other 
individuals  also  became  known  for  similar  labors,  of  whom  we  shall  pres 
ently  give  an  account.4 

V.  One  of  the  most  important  of  the  ancient  vocabularies  is  that  which 
is  commonly  called  the  Etymologicum  Magnum,  the  compiler  of  which  is 
unknown,  but  is  supposed  by  some  to  have  been  a  grammarian  of  the 
name  of  Magnus.     The  opinion  of  Thomasius  and  others,  who  suspected 
that  Marcus  Musurus,  or  the  two  Calliergi,  compiled  this  work,  is  suffi 
ciently  refuted  by  the  fact  that  it  is  quoted  by  Eustathius  under  the  title 
of  Tb  Me'7a  ^rv^o\oyiK6v>     The  date  of  this  compilation  is  placed  by  Syl- 
burg  in  the  tenth  century.     It  certainly  can  not  be  referred  to  a  higher 
era,  since  its  author  quotes  Theognotus,  who  lived  in  the  ninth  century. 
It  is  very  valuable  from  the  numerous  extracts  which  it  contains  of  older 
grammarians,  some  of  whose  works  are  still  extant  in  manuscript,  while 

1  SckSll,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  v.,  p.  1,  seqq.     Compare  GrSfenhan,  Gesch.  Klass.  Pkilol., 
vol.  i.,  p.  93,  seqq.  *  ScMll,  I.  c. 

3  Quarterly  Review,  No>  xliv.,  1820,  p,  304,  seqq.  *  Ibid.,  I.  c, 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  491 

others,  as,  for  instance,  the  Etymologicum  of  Orion  the  Theban,  have  been 
not  very  long  ago  published  for  the  first  time.  Considerable  expectation 
had  been  excited  among  scholars  by  a  notice,  which  Kulenkamp  published 
in  1765,  of  a  manuscript  etymologicon  formerly  in  the  possession  of  Mar- 
quardus  Gudius.  The  entire  lexicon  was  published  at  Leipzig,  1818,  4to, 
under  the  editorial  care  of  Sturz.  It  turns  out  to  be,  however,  a  mere 
farrago  of  etymological  nonsense,  useful  only  so  far  as  it  serves  to  cor 
rect  some  passages  of  other  lexicons.1  An  account  of  the  lexicons  of 
Photius,  Hesychius,  and  Suidas  will  be  given  under  the  Byzantine  Period. 

VI.  In  connection  with  this  part  of  our  subject  wejnay  mention  the 
ancient  Scholiasts  (SxoAtatrraO,3  who  occupied  themselves  with  the  ex 
planation  of  the  earlier  writers.     Generally  speaking,  they  have  merely 
transmitted  to  us  extracts  from  previous  commentators,  but  it  is  precise 
ly  this  which  constitutes  their  value  in  our  eyes,  since  most  of  the  com 
mentaries  from  which  they  made  their  selections  have  perished.     By  the 
term  scholium  (o^Ato^)  is  properly  meant  an  explanatory  note  in  the  mar 
gin  of  a  manuscript,  in  contradistinction  from  a  gloss  (7X0)0-0-0),  which 
properly  meant  a  note  between  the  lines.     These  scholia  originally  appear 
to  have  been  nothing  more  than  extracts  from  preceding  commentaries, 
and  not  to  have  come  from  the  scholiasts  themselves.     In  process  of 
time,  however,  when  these  marginal  notes  had  multiplied  in  number,  and 
could  no  longer,  for  want  of  room,  be  placed  by  the  side  of  the  text,  they 
were  copied  off  into  a  separate  codex  or  MS.,  and  formed,  as  it  were, 
a  species  of  commentary  by  themselves.     These  collections  of  scholia, 
however,  were  not  what  we  would  call  a  regularly  interwoven  body  of 
comments,  but  oftentimes  opinions  more  or  less  opposed  to  one  another, 
were  placed  side  by  side,  introduced  by  such  brief  expressions  as  ^,  &\- 
\<as,  ^  OI/TWS,  rti/w,  and  the  like.     The  greater  part  of  these  scholia  are 
extracted  from  the  best  commentaries  of  the  Alexandrine  school.     Oth 
ers,  where  less  care  has  been  exercised  in  the  selection,  are  of  compar 
atively  little  value.     Very  little  original  matter,  therefore,  may  be  ex 
pected  in  either  case.     The  race  of  scholiasts  continued  until  the  fall  of 
the  Eastern  empire.     Some  are  even  found  after  this,  as  late  as  the  six 
teenth  century.3 

VII.  We  will  now  give  a  brief  account  of  some  of  the  most  distin 
guished   Grammarians,  Lexicographers,   and   Scholiasts  belonging  to  the 
present  period,  observing  the  following  order  :  1.  Grammarians  who  have 
written  upon  dialects.     2.  Lexicographers.     3.  Scholiasts.     4.  Gramma 
rians  in  general. 

GRAMMARIANS. WRITERS     ON     DIALECTS. 

I.  TRYPHON  (Tpttyxwi/),*  of  Alexandrea,  son  of  Ammonius,  lived  before 
and  during  the  reign  of  Augustus.  A  long  list  of  his  works  in  almost 
every  department  of  grammar  is  given  by  Suidas.  Many  of  these  still 
exist  in  MS.  His  treatise  entitled  UdOij  \f£cw  was  published  by  Con- 

1  Quarterly  Review,  I.  c. 

2  Scholl,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  vi.,  p.  268 ;  Grafcnhan,  Gesch.  Klass.  Philol.,  vol.  iii.,  p. 
274,  seqq.  3  Grafenkan,  I.  c.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


492  GREEK     LITERATURE, 

stantine  Lascaris  at  the  end  of  his  Greek  grammar,  Milan,  1476,  4to,  and 
in  the  other  editions  of  the  same.  Stephens  also  placed  it,  translated 
into  Latin,  at  the  end  of  his  Thesaurus,  whence  it  passed  into  the  lexi 
con  of  Scapula.  A  much  better  edition,  however,  is  that  of  Blomfield,  in 
the  Museum  Criticum,  Cambridge,  1814,  vol.  i.,  p.  32,  seqq.  Another 
treatise,  Tlepl  T/>oV&«/,  is  also  given  by  Blomfield  in  the  same  work,  p.  43, 
seqq.,  and  by  Boissonade,  Anecd.  Grac.,  vol.  iiL,  p.  270,  seqq.  There  is 
also  an  edition  by  Passow  and  Schneider,  from  a  Breslau  MS.,  published 
in  1820,  in  the  first  volume  of  the  Museum  Criticum  Vratislamense.  This 
is  the  best  edition. 

II.  PHRYNICHUS  ($pwixos),  a  grammarian,  described  by  some  as  an 
Arabian,  and  by  others  as  a  Bithynian,  lived  under  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus 
and  Commodus.     His  great  work  was  entitled  ^o^urriK^  npo-jrapaa-Kevr], 
in  thirty-seven  books,  of  which  we  still  possess  a  fragment,  published  by 
Bekker,  in  his  Anecdota  Gr<zca,  vol.  i.,  p.  1,  seqq.     He  also  wrote  a  lexi 
con  of  Attic  words  (*E/cAo79;  p-rjudruv  Kal  bvofjiaruv  'Arrncwv),  which  is  still 
extant,  and  the  best  edition  of  which  is  by  Lobeck,  Leipzig,  1830. 

III.  MCERIS  (MoT/Jis),1  commonly  called  MCERIS  ATTICISTA,  a  distinguished 
grammarian,  of  whose  personal  history  nothing  is  known.     He  is  con 
jectured  to  have  lived  about  the  end  of  the  second  century  of  our  era. 
He  was  the  author  of  a  work,  still  extant,  entitled  MoipiSos  ^ArrtKiffrov 
Ae£e«  '^.TTIKOOV  /col  'E\\-f)vcay  Kara.  GToi~x*iov,  though  the  title  varies  some 
what  in  different  MSS.    In  some  MSS.  the  name  of  the  author  is  given 
as  Eumacris  or  Eumcerides.     The  treatise  is  a  sort  of  comparison  of  the 
Attic  with  other  Greek  dialects  ;  consisting  of  a  list  of  Attic  words  and 
expressions,  which  are  illustrated  or  explained  by  those  of  other  dialects, 
especially  the  common  Greek.     It  was  first  published  in  1712,  at  Oxford, 
edited  by  Hudson.     A  much  better  edition  is  that  of  Pierson,  Leyden, 
1759,  reprinted,  with  some  additions,  by  Koch,  Leipzig,  1831.     The  best 
text  is  by  Bekker,  with  Harpocration,  Berlin,  1833,  8vo. 

LEXICOGRAPHER  S. 


I.  APOLLONIUS  fATroAA&woy),2  of  Alexandrea,  an  eminent  grammarian, 
lived  about  the  time  of  Augustus,  and  was  the  teacher  of  Apion,  while 
he  himself  had  been  a  pupil  of  the  school  of  Didymus.  This,  at  least,  is 
the  statement  of  Suidas,  which  Villoison  has  endeavored  to  confirm. 
Other  critics,  however,  as  Ruhnken,  believe  that  Apollonius  lived  after 
the  time  of  Apion,  and  that  our  ApoIIonins,  in  his  Homeric  lexicon,  made 
use  of  a  similar  work  written  by  Apion.  This  opinion  seems,  indeed,  to 
be  the  more  probable  one  of  the  two  ;  but,  however  this  may  be,  the  Ho 
meric  lexicon  of  Apollonius  to  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey,  which  is  still  ex 
tant,  is  to  us  a  valuable  and  instructive  relic  of  antiquity,  if  we  consider 
the  loss  of  so  many  other  works  of  the  same  kind.  It  is  unfortunately, 
however,  very  much  interpolated,  and  must  be  used  with  great  caution. 

The  first  edition  of  the  lexicon  was  published  by  Villoison  from  a  St.  Germain  MS. 
belonging  to  the  tenth  century,  Paris,  1773,  2  vols.  fol.,  with  valuable  prolegomena,  and 
a  Latin  translation.  It  was  reprinted  the  same  year  at  Leipzig,  in  2  vols.  4to.  Tollius 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Btogr.,  a.  v.  2  Id.  il>.t  s,  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  493 

afterward  published  a  new  edition,  with  some  additional  notes,  but  without  Villoison's 
prolegomena  and  translation,  Leyden,  1788,  8vo,  The  latest  edition  is  by  Bekker,  Ber 
lin,  1833,  8vo,  and  is  a  very  useful  one, 

II.  HERODIANUS,  JULIUS  (Aftuos  'Hpafiiavts),1  one  of  the  most  celebrated 
grammarians  of  antiquity.  He  was  the  son  of  Apollonius  Dyscolus,  to 
be  presently  mentioned,  and  was  born  at  Alexandrea.  From  that  place 
he  appears  to  have  removed  to  Rome,  where  he  gained  the  favor  of  the 
Emperor  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus,  to  whom  he  dedicated  a  work  on  prosody. 
No  farther  biographical  particulars  are  known  respecting  him.  The  esti 
mation  in  which  he  was  held  by  subsequent  grammarians  was  very  great. 
Priscian  styles  him  maximus  auctor  artis  grammatics.  He  was  a  very 
voluminous  writer,  but  probably  the  only  one  of  his  works  that  has  come 
down  to  us  complete  is  the  Tlepl  Movypovs  Ae'|ecw  (on  monosyllabic  words), 
to  be  mentioned  hereafter,  though  several  extracts  from  others  are  pre 
served  by  later  grammarians.  The  work  most  worthy  of  notice  here  was 
the  'ETfifj.fpta-/M>i,  devoted  to  the  explanation  of  difficult,  obscurer  and  doubt 
ful  words,  and  of  peculiar  forms  found  in  Homer, 

A  meagre  compilation  from  this  highly  valuable  work  was  published  from  Paris  MSS. 
by  Boissonade,  London,  1819.  Another  abstract,  which  appears  to  give  a  better  idea  of 
the  original,  is  published  in  Cramer's  Anecdota  Gr.  Oxon.,  vol.  i.  Several  important  quo 
tations  from  this  work  are  also  found  scattered  in  different  parts  of  the  scholia  on  Ho 
mer. 

HI.  TIM^SUS  (Ttjuaws),2  the  sophist,  wrote  a  Lexicon  to  Plato,  which  is 
still  extant.  The  time  at  which  he  lived  is  quite  uncertain.  Ruhnken 
places  him  in  the  third  century  of  the  Christian  era,  which  produced  so 
many  ardent  admirers  of  the  Platonic  philosophy,  such  as  Porphyry,  Lon- 
ginus,  Plotinus,  &c.  The  lexicon  is  very  brief,  and  bears  the  title 
TJJUOIOU  ffo^urrov  fK  runs  TOV  Tlxdrowos  Ae|eco^,  from  which  it  might  have 
been  inferred  that  it  is  an  extract  from  a  larger  work,  had  not  Photras 
(Cod.  151),  who  had  read  it,  described  it  as  a  very  short  work  (Bpaxv 
TronjfjidTiov  eV  kvl  \6y(f}.  It  is  evident,  however,  that  the  work,  as  it  stands, 
has  received  several  interpolations  of  words  occurring  in  Herodotus. 
Notwithstanding  these  interpolations,  the  work  is  one  of  great  value,  and 
the  explanations  of  words  are  some  of  the  very  best  that  have  come  down 
to  us  from  the  ancient  grammarians.  The  work  on  rhetorical  arguments, 
in  sixty-eight  books  (2v\\oy^  pijropiKcai'  a<f>o0uw;/),  which  Suidas  assigns  to 
Timaeus  of  Tauromenium,  was  more  probably  written  by  Timaeus,  the 
author  of  the  lexicon  to  Plato. 

The  lexicon  to  Plato  was  printed  for  the  first  time  from  a  manuscript  at  Paris,  edited 
by  Ruhnken,  Leyden,  1754,  with  a  very  valuable  commentary  ;  and  again,  with  many 
improvements,  Leyden,  1789.  There  are  also  two  more  recent  editions  by  Koch,  Leip 
zig,  1828  and  1833. 

IV.  Among  the  lexicographers  of  this  period  is  usually,  though  perhaps 
not  very  correctly,  placed  JULIUS  POLLUX  (('lottos  noAvSe&cTjy),3  a  Greek 
sophist  and  grammarian,  and  a  native  of  Naucratis,  in  Egypt.  He  re 
ceived  instruction  in  criticism  from  his  father,  and  afterward  went  to 
Athens,  where  he  studied  rhetoric  under  the  sophist  Adrian.  He  opened 
1  Smith,  Diet.  #%r,,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib,  3  Id,  ib, 


494  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

a  private  school  at  Athens,  where  he  gave  instruction  in  grammar  and 
rhetoric,  and  was  subsequently  appointed  by  the  Emperor  Commodus  to 
the  chair  of  rhetoric  at  Athens.  He  died  during  the  reign  of  Commodus, 
at  the  age  of  fifty-eight.  We  may,  therefore,  assign  A.D.  183  as  the  year 
in  which  he  flourished.  Philostratus  praises  his  critical  skill,  but  speaks 
unfavorably  of  his  rhetorical  powers,  and  implies  that  he  gained  his  pro 
fessor's  chair  from  Commodus  simply  by  his  mellifluous  voice.  He  seems 
to  have  been  attacked  by  many  of  his  contemporaries  on  account  of  the 
inferior  character  of  his  oratory,  and  especially  by  Lucian  in  his 


Pollux  was  the  author  of  several  works,  all  of  which  have  perished  ex 
cept  the  Onomasticon,  which  has  come  down  to  us.  This  work  is  divided 
into  ten  books,  each  of  which  contains  a  short  dedication  to  the  Casar 
Commodus  ;  and  the  work  was  therefore  published  before  A.D.  i77,  since 
Commodus  became  Augustus  in  that  year.  The  title  of  the  work  is  ex 
plained  as  follows  by  Hemsterhuis  :  "  Onomasticorum  munus  est  commoda 
rebus  nomina  imponere,  et  docere  guibus  verbis  ubcriore  quadam  etflorente  ele- 
gantia  rem  unam  designare  possimus.  Non  enim  in  Onomasticis  tanquam 
proprio  quodam  loco  de  vocum  difficilliorum  interpretatione  agebatur,  sed  quo 
pacto  propriis  res  qu&vis  et  plunbus  insigniri  posset  verbis." 

Each  book  of  the  Onomasticon  forms  a  separate  treatise  by  itself,  con 
taining  the  most  important  words  relating  to  certain  subjects,  with  short 
explanations  of  the  meaning  of  the  words,  which  are  frequently  illustrated 
by  quotations  from  the  ancient  writers.  The  alphabetical  arrangement 
is  not  adopted,  but  the  words  are  given  according  to  the  subjects  treated 
of  in  each  book.  The  object  of  the  work  was  to  present  youths  with  a 
kind  of  store-house,  from  which  they  could  borrow  all  the  words  of  which 
they  had  need,  and  could,  at  the  same  time,  learn  their  usage  in  the  best 
writers.  The  contents  of  each  book  will  give  the  best  idea  of  the  nature 
of  the  work.  1.  The  first  treats  of  the  gods  and  their  worship,  of  kings, 
of  speed  and  slowness,  of  dyeing,  of  commerce  and  manufactures,  of  fer 
tility  and  the  contrary,  of  time  and  the  divisions  of  the  year,  of  houses, 
of  ships,  of  war,  of  horses,  of  agriculture,  of  the  parts  of  the  plough  and 
the  wagon,  and  of  bees.  2.  The  second  treats  of  man,  his  eye,  the  parts 
of  his  body,  and  the  like.  3.  Of  relations,  of  political  life,  of  friends,  of 
the  love  of  country,  of  love,  of  the  relation  between  masters  and  slaves, 
of  money,  of  travelling,  and  numerous  other  subjects.  4.  Of  the  various 
branches  of  knowledge  and  science.  5.  Of  hunting,  animals,  &c.  6.  Of 
meals,  the  names  of  crimes,  &c.  7.  Of  the  different  trades,  &c.  8.  Of 
the  courts,  the  administration  of  justice,  &c.  9.  Of  towns,  buildings, 
coins,  games,  &c.  10.  Of  various  vessels,  &c.  In  consequence  of  the 
loss  of  the  great  number  of  lexicographical  works  from  which  Pollux 
compiled  his  Onomasticon,  this  book  has  become  one  of  the  greatest 
value  for  acquiring  a  knowledge  of  Greek  antiquity,  and  explains  many 
subjects  which  are  known  to  us  from  no  other  source.  It  has  also  pre 
served  many  fragments  of  lost  writers,  and  the  great  number  of  authors 
quoted  in  the  work  may  be  seen  by  a  glance  at  the  long  list  given  in 
Fabriciua. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  495 

The  first  three  editions  of  the  Onomasticon  contain  simply  the  Greek  text,  without  a 
Latin  translation,  and  with  numerous  errors.  They  are  by  Aldus,  Venice,  1502,  fol.,  by 
Junta,  Florence,  1520,  fol.,  and  by  Grynaeus,  Basle,  1536,  4to.  The  first  Greek  and  Latin 
edition  was  by  Seber,  Frankfort,  1608,  4to,  with  the  text  corrected  from  MSS.  The  Latin 
translation  given  in  this  edition  had  been  previously  published  by  Walther  at  Basle, 
1541,  8vo.  The  next  edition  is  the  very  valuable  one,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  by  Lederlin 
and  Hemsterhuis,  Amsterdam,  1706,  fol.,  containing  copious  notes  by  Jungermann, 
Kiihn,  and  the  two  editors.  An  account  of  this  edition  will  be  found  in  Monk's  Life  of 
Bentley,  p.  153,  seqq.,  where  some  curious  particulars  are  stated  respecting  the  effect 
produced  upon  Hemsterhuis  (then  not  yet  eighteen  years  of  age  !)  by  the  masterly  emen 
dations  of  the  great  English  scholar,  transmitted  to  the  former  after  the  publication  of 
his  edition  of  Pollux.  In  1824,  W.  Dindorf  published  an  edition,  Leipzig,  5  vols.  8vo, 
containing  the  labors  of  the  previous  commentators.  The  last  edition  is  by  Bekker, 
Berlin,  1846,  which  gives  only  the  Greek  text,  in  probably  its  most  correct  form. 


SCHOLIASTS.1 

I.  At  the  head  of  the  scholiasts  is  placed,  singularly  enough,  a  prince 
alternately  the  persecutor  and  the  patron  of  letters,  namely,  PTOLEMY 
VII.,  or  EUERGETES,  whose  life  was  almost  one  continued  succession  of 
crimes  and  folly,  but  who  still  retained  in  a  great  degree  that  love  of  let 
ters  which  appears  to  have  been  hereditary  in  the  whole  race  of  the 
Ptolemies.     He  had  in  his  youth  been  a  pupil  of  Aristarchus,  and  not 
only  courted  the  society  of  learned  men,  but  was  himself  the  author  of  a 
Commentary  on  Homer.     He  is  also  named  among  the  Siopflomu  of  that 
poet,  whether  it  was  that  he  actually  made  a  recension  of  the  Iliad  and 
Odyssey,  or  was  content  to  take  these  two  poems  as  the  subject  of  his 
critical  labors.     He  also  wrote  a  Literary  History  of  Egypt,  and  a  work 
entitled  'TTro^v^aTo,  or  Memoirs,  in  twenty-four  books,  repeatedly  cited 
by  Athenaeus,  and  which  would  seem  to  have  been  a  sort  of  general  nat 
ural  history  rather  than  an  historical  narration  of  events. 

II.  DIDYMUS  (Ai'Su^os)2  has  already  been  mentioned  as  belonging  partly 
to  the  present  period,  and  partly  to  the  one  which  preceded  it.     An  ac 
count  of  his  scholia  on  Homer  and  other  ancient  poets  has  been  given 
elsewhere. 

III.  APION  ('ATnW),3  a  Greek  grammarian,  was  a  native  of  Oasis  Magna, 
in  Africa.     He  studied  at  Alexandrea,  and  taught  rhetoric  at  Rome,  in 
the  reigns  of  Tiberius  and  Claudius.    He  appears  to  have  enjoyed  an  ex 
traordinary  reputation  for  extensive  knowledge,  and  versatility  as  an  or 
ator  ;  but  the  ancients  are  unanimous  in  censuring  his  ostentatious  van 
ity.     He  is  spoken  of  as  the  most  active  of  grammarians,  and  the  sur 
name  Mo'xflos,  which  he  bore,  according  to  Suidas,  is  usually  explained  as 
describing  the  zeal  and  labor  with  which  he  prosecuted  his  studies.     In 
the  reign  of  Caligula  he  travelled  about  in  Greece,  and  was  received 
every  where  with  the  highest  honors  as  the  great  interpreter  of  Homer. 
About  the  sa»e  time,  A.D.  38,  the  inhabitants  of  Alexandrea  sent  him,  at 
the  head  of  an  embassy,  to  Caligula,  to  prefer  complaints  against  the  Jews 
residing  in  their  city.    The  results  of  this  embassy  are  unknown  ;  but,  if 
we  may  believe  the  account  of  his  enemy  Josephus,  he  died  of  a  disease 
which  he  had  brought  upon  himself  by  his  dissolute  mode  of  life. 

,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  vi.,  p.  268,  afqq.         2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogrn  s.  v.  ~ 


496  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Apion  was  the  author  of  a  considerable  number  of  works,  all  of  which 
are  now  lost,  with  the  exception  of  some  fragments.  1.  Upon  Homer, 
whose  poems  seem  to  have  formed  the  principal  part  of  his  studies,  for 
he  is  said  not  only  to  have  made  the  best  recension  of  the  text  of  the 
poems,  but  to  have  written  explanations  of  phrases  and  words  (Ae'£ets 
'OjUTjpt/ccu'),  and  investigations  concerning  the  life  and  native  country  of  the 
poet.  The  best  part  of  his  \e£eis  'O/j-yptKai  is  supposed  to  be  incorporated 
in  the  Homeric  lexicon  of  Apollonius.  Apion's  labors  on  Homer  are 
often  referred  to  by  Eustathius  and  other  grammarians.  2.  A  work  on 
Egypt  (AryvTmo/ccO,  consisting  of  five  books,  which  was  highly  valued  in 
antiquity,  as  it  contained  descriptions  of  nearly  all  the  remarkable  objects 
in  that  country.  It  also  contained  numerous  attacks  upon  the  Jews.  3. 
A  work  against  the  JewTs.  A  reply  to  these  attacks  is  made  by  Josephus, 
in  the  second  book  of  his  work  usually  called  Kara  'ATT^WOS,  and  this  re 
ply  is  the  only  source  from  which  we  learn  any  thing  about  the  character 
of  Apion's  work.  4.  A  work  in  praise  of  Alexander  the  Great.  5.  His 
tories  of  separate  countries,  and  one  or  two  other  works. 

The  historical  fragments  of  Apion  are  given  by  C.  Miiller,  in  his  Fragm.  Histor.  Grcec., 
vol.  iii.,  p.  506,  se.qq. ;  in  Didot's  BMiotheca  Gr#ca,  Paris,  1849.  For  information  respect 
ing  the  other  remains  of  Apion,  the  student  is  referred  to  Lehrs,  Quast.  Ep.,  p.  23,  note, 
p.  33,  seqq.,  and  Ritschl,  Die  Alex.  BibL,  p.  142,  seqq. 

IV.  EPAPHRODITUS,  MARCUS  METTIUS  ('ETro^p^StTos),1  a  native  of  Chae- 
ronea,  and  one  of  the  most  celebrated  scholiasts  of  the  first  century  of 
our  era.     He  was  the  disciple  of  Archias  of  Alexandrea,  and  became  the 
slave,  and  afterward  the  freedrnan  of  Modestus,  the  praefect  of  Egypt, 
whose  son  Pitelinus  had  been  educated  by  him.     After  having  obtained 
his  freedom,  he  went  to  Rome,  where  he  resided  in  the  reign  of  Nero, 
and  down  to  the  time  of  Nerva,  and  enjoyed  a  very  high  reputation  for 
learning.    He  was  extremely  fond  of  books,  and  is  said  to  have  collected 
a  library  of  30,000  valuable  works.    He  died  of  dropsy,  at  the  age  of  sev 
enty-five.     He  was  the  author  of  several  grammatical  works  and  com 
mentaries  ;   for  example,  on  Homer's  Iliad  and  Odyssey,  on  Hesiod's 
Shield  of  Hercules,  and  on  the  Afrta  of  Callimachus,  which  is  frequently 
referred  to  by  Stephanus  Byzantinus  and  the  scholiast  on  ^Eschylus.    He 
is  also  mentioned  several  times  in  the  Venetian  scholia  on  the  Iliad.    His 
works  are  lost. 

V.  Two  scholiasts  still  remain  to  be  mentioned,  namely,  PTOLEM^EUS 
of  Alexandrea,  a  disciple  of  Aristarchus,  who  wrote,  among  other  works, 
a  Commentary  on  Homer;  and  ARISTON!CUS,  of  the  same  city,  who  is  men 
tioned  as  the  author  of  several  works,  most  of  them  relating  to  the  Ho 
meric  poems.     1.  On  the  wanderings  of  Menelaus.     2.  On  the  critical 
signs  by  which  the  Alexandrine  critics  used  to  mark  the  suspected  or  in 
terpolated  verses  in  the  Homeric  poems,  and  in  Hesiod's  Theogony.     3. 
On  irregular  grammatical  constructions  in  Homer,  consisting  of  six  books. 
These  and  some  other  works  are  now  lost,  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
fragments. ^ 

1  Smitk,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


R  O  M  A  N      F  K  li  I  O  D.  497 


GRAMMARIANS  PROPERLY  SO  CALLED. 


I.  DEMETRIUS  (Arj^rptos)  of  Adramyttium,  surnamed  IXION,  because  he 
had  committed  a  robbery  in  the  temple  of  Juno,  at  Alexandrea,1  was  a 
Greek  grammarian  of  the  time  of  Augustus,  and  lived  partly  at  Perga- 
mum  and  partly  at  Alexandrea,  where  he  belonged  to  the  critical  school 
of  Aristarchus.     He  is  mentioned  as  the  author  of  the  following  works  : 
1.  'Etfy-rjcris  €ls"Op.t]pov,  which  is  often  referred  to.     2.  5E|7j77j<ns  ds  'Hai- 
o5oj/.      3.  'ETVfj.ohoyov/j.€va,  or  'ErvpoXoyia.     4.  Hfpl  TTJS  'Ate^avSpecw  SiaAe/c- 
rov.     5.  'ArriKal  y\u(T(rai,  of  which  a  few  fragments  are  still  extant.     6. 
On  the  Greek  verbs  ending  in  pi. 

II.  DRACO  (ApaKwv),  a  grammarian  of  Stratonicea,  flourished  in  the 
time  of  Hadrian.     Suidas  mentions  several  works  of  his,  of  which  only 
one  (ircpl  /LLfrpwv)  is  extant.     It  is  said  to  be  an  extract  from  a  larger 
work,  and  has  been  edited  by  Hermann  from  a  copy  of  the  Paris  MS. 
furnished  by  Bast,  Leipzig,  1812,  8vo. 

III.  APOLLONIUS,  surnamed  DyscoLus2  ('ATTOAA^JOS  AtWoAos),  that  is, 
the  ill-tempered,  wras  a  native  of  Alexandrea,  where  he  flourished  in  the 
reigns  of  Hadrian  and  Antoninus  Pius.     He  was  one  of  the  most  re 
nowned  grammarians  of  his  time,  partly  on  account  of  his  numerous  and 
excellent  works,  and  partly  on  account  of  his  son,  ^Elius  Herodianus, 
who  had  been  educated  by  him,  and  was  as  great  a  grammarian  as  him 
self.     Apollonius  is  said  to  have  been  so  poor  that  he  was  obliged  to 
write  on  shells,  as  he  had  no  means  of  procuring  the  ordinary  writing 
materials,  and  this  poverty  created  that  state  of  mind  to  which  he  owed 
the  surname  of  Dyscolus.     Apollonius  and  his  son  are  called  by  Priscian, 
in  several  passages,  the  greatest  of  all  grammarians,  and  he  declares 
that  it  was  only  owing  to  the  assistance  which  he  derived  from  their 
works  that  he  was  enabled  to  undertake  his  task.     He  was  the  first  who 
reduced  grammar  to  any  thing  like  a  system.     A  list  of  his  works,  some 
of  which  are  lost,  is  given  by  Suidas.    The  following  productions  of  his  are 
still  extant  :   1.  TLepl  erwTo|e&>s  TOV  \6yov  pcpon/,  "  De  C&nstructione  Oratio- 
nis,"  in  four  books.     2.  Tlfpl  cb/rwu/Atas,  "  De  Pronomine  liber.'1''     3.  TIzpl 
crwSco'fAan',  "  De  Conjunctionibus  ;"  and,  4.  Ilepl  'ETTJP^TJ/UOT&H/,  "  De  Adverb- 
iis."     Among  the  works  ascribed  to  Apollonius  by  Suidas  there  is  one, 
TTfpl  KaTetyevo-fjifirrjs  itrropias,  on  fictitious  or  forged  histories.     A  work  un 
der  this  title  has  come  down  to  us,  and  has  been  three  times  edited,  the 
last  edition  being  by  Teucher,  Leipzig,  1792,  8vo.     The  work,  however, 
is  merely  a  collection  of  wonderful  phenomena  of  nature,  gathered  from 
Aristotle,  Theophrastus,  and  others,  and,  of  course,  is  very  different  from 
what  the  title  would  lead  us  to  expect.     It  has  been  supposed,  therefore, 
with  great  probability,  that  the  work  of  Apollonius  with  this  title  is  lost, 
and  that  the  one  which  has  been  mistaken  for  it  belongs  to  an  Apollonius 
who  is  otherwise  unknown. 

The  treatise  "  De  Constructione  Orationis"  was  first  published  by  Aldus,  Venice,  1495, 
fol.  A  much  better  edition,  with  a  Latin  translation  and  notes,  was  published  by  Syl- 
burg,  Frankfort,  1590,  4to.  The  last  edition,  which  was  greatly  corrected  by  the  assist- 

1  Suidas,  s.  v.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  t>. 


498  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

ance  of  four  new  MS S.,  is  Bekker's,  Berlin,  1817,  8vo.  The  treatise  "  De  Pronomine"  was 
first  edited  by  Bekker,  in  the  Museum  Antiq.  Stud.,  i.,  2,  Berlin,  1811, 8vo,  and  afterward 
separately,  Berlin,  1814,  8vo.  The  treatise  "  De  Conjunctionibus"  and  that  "  De  Adverb- 
its"  are  both  printed  in  Bekker's  Anecdota  Groeca,  vol.  ii.,  p.  477,  seqq. 

IV.  HERODIANUS  JULIUS,  already  mentioned  under  the  lexicographers, 
was  the  son  of  the  preceding,  and  one  of  the  most  celebrated  grammari 
ans  of  antiquity,  as  before  remarked.     The  only  complete  treatise  which 
we  possess  of  the  numerous  works  composed  by  him  is  probably  the  one, 
irepl  p.ovS]povs  A.e£e«s,  on  monosyllabic  words,  published  by  Dindorf  in  the 
first  volume  of  his  Grammatici  Graci,  Leipzig,  1823. 

V.  NICANOR  (NjKoj/wp),1  a  celebrated  grammarian,  who  lived  during  the 
reign  of  the  Emperor  Hadrian.     According  to  Suidas,  he  was  of  Alex- 
andrea,  but  according  to  Stephanus  Byzantinus,  he  was  of  Hierapolis. 
His  labors  were  principally  directed  to  punctuation ;  hence  he  received 
the  ludicrous  name  of  ^riy/jLarias,  and  from  his  having  devoted  much  of 
his  time  to  the  elucidation  of  Homer's  writings,  through  means  of  punc 
tuation,  he  is  called  by  Stephanus  6  v4os"Ofj.-npos.     He  wrote,  also,  on  the 
punctuation  of  Callimachus,  and  a  work  irepl  Kad6\ov  o-Tty/i^s.     He  is  co 
piously  quoted  in  the  Scholia  Marciana  on  Homer. 

VI.  ARCADIUS  ('Ap/caSios),2  of  Antioch,  a  Greek  grammarian  of  uncertain 
date,  but  who  did  not  live  before  200  A.D.     He  was  the  author  of  several 
grammatical  works,  some  of  which  are  mentioned  by  Suidas.     A  work 
of  his  on  Accents  (irepl  r6va>v)  has  come  down  to  us,  and  was  first  pub 
lished  by  Barker  from  a  Paris  manuscript,  Leipzig,  1820.     It  is  also  in 
cluded  in  the  first  volume  of  Dindorf 's  Grammat.  Grac.,  Leipzig,  1823. 

VII.  HEPH^ESTION  ('H^aitrnW),3  a  Greek  grammarian,  who  instructed 
the  Emperor  Verus  in  Greek,  and  accordingly  lived  about  the  middle  of 
the  second  century  after  Christ.     Suidas,  who  mentions  several  works 
of  his,  speaks  of  one  entitled  ^erpuv  reftcr/tof,  which  is  believed  to  be  the 
same  as  the  'Eyxeip'l^l°'/  ""«/>*  /j-crptav,  which  has  come  down  to  us  under 
the  name  of  Hephaestion,  and  is  a  tolerably  complete  manual  of  Greek 
metres,  forming,  in  fact,  the  basis  of  all  our  knowledge  on  that  subject. 
This  little  work  is  of  great  value,  not  only  on  account  of  the  information 
it  affords  us  on  the  subject  it  treats  of,  but  also  on  account  of  the  numer 
ous  quotations  it  contains  from  other  writers,  especially  poets. 

The  first  edition  of  the  'E-yx^piSio"  appeared  at  Florence,  1526,  8vo,  together  with  the 
Greek  grammar  of  Theodore  Gaza.  It  was  followed  by  the  editions  of  Turnebus,  Paris, 
1553,  4to  (with  some  Greek  scholia),  and  of  De  Pauw,  Utrecht,  1726,  8vo.  The  best  edi 
tion,  however,  is  that  of  Gaisford,  Oxford,  1810,  8vo,  reprinted  at  Leipzig,  1832,  8vo. 

VIII.  DOSITHEUS  (A«<ri0eos),4  surnamed  MAGISTER,  a  Greek  grammarian, 
taught  at  Rome  about  A.D.  207.     He  has  left  behind  him,  in  two  manu 
scripts,  a  work  entitled  'Ep/juivevnaTa,  divided  into  three  books.     The  first 
and  second  books  contain  a  Greek  grammar  written  in  Latin,  and  Greek- 
Latin  and  Latin-Greek  glossaries.     The  first  book  remains  unpublished, 
and  deservedly.     The  second  book,  containing  the  glossaries,  was  pub 
lished  by  H.  Stephens,  1573,  fol.,  and  has  since  been  several  times  re 
printed.     The  third  book  contains  translations  from  Latin  authors  into 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Id.  ib.,  *.  v.  3  Id.  ib.,  s.  v.  *  Id.  ib.,  s.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  499 

Greek,  and  vice  versa,  the  Latin  and  Greek  being  placed  in  opposite  col 
umns.  This  part  of  the  work  deserves  attention.  It  consists  of  six  di 
visions  or  chapters,  the  first  of  which,  entitled  Dim  Hadriani  Sententia  el 
Epistola,  contains  legal  anecdotes  of  Hadrian,  his  answers  to  petitioners, 
a  letter  written  by  himself  to  his  mother,  and  a  notice  of  a  law  concern 
ing  parricide.  The  third  chapter  is  a  fragment  relative  to  the  civil  law, 
and  is  probably  an  extract  from  the  Regula.  of  Paulus.  These  chapters 
have  been  published  separately,  but  the  whole  of  the  third  book  has  been 
edited  by  Booking,  16mo,  Bonn,  1832. 

IX.  CONON  (KoVcoj/),1  a  grammarian  of  the  age  of  Augustus,  the  au 
thor  of  a  work  entitled  Anry^orets,  addressed  to  Archelaus  Philopator. 
king  of  Cappadocia.     It  was  a  collection  of  fifty  narratives  relating  to  the 
mythical  and  heroic  period,  and  especially  the  foundation  of  colonies. 
An  epitome  of  this  work  has  been  preserved  in  the  Bibliotheca  of  Pho- 
tius,  who  speaks  in  terms  of  commendation  of  his  Attic  style.     There 
are  separate  editions  of  this  abstract  in  Gale's  Histar.  Poet.  Script.,  p.  241, 
seqq.,  Paris,  1675 ;  by  Teucher,  Leipzig,  1794  and  1802 ;  by  Kanne,  Got- 
tingen,  1798  ;  and  by  Westermann,  in  his  Scriptores  Poetica  Historic  Gra- 
ci,  Brunswick,  1843. 

X.  PTOLEMY  (nToAe/ialbs),8  ef  Alexandrea,  surnamed  Chermus,  flour 
ished  under  Trajan  and  Hadrian.     His  works  were,  wepl  irapa86l-ov  'HTT- 
opias ;  an  historical  drama,  entitled  2^17!  /  and  an  epic  poem,  in  twenty- 
four  rhapsodies,  entitled  'A^wpos,  and  some  others.     We  still  possess, 
in  the  Bibliotheca  of  Photius,  an  epitome  of  the  work  of  Ptolemy,  irepl 
TTJS  fls  iroAt^uafliaf  Kaivr\s  IffToptas,  in  seven  books,  which,  there  can  be  lit 
tle  doubt,  is  the  same  as  that  which  Suidas  mentions  by  the  title  irepl 
TrapaSdtov  la-ropias.     It  is  a  farrago  of  the  most  heterogeneous  materials. 
The  work  irepl  irapaSo'lou  Iffropias  has  been  edited,  with  commentaries  by 
Schottus  and  Hoeschelius,  in  Gale's  Historic.  Poetica,  Scriptores,  p.  303, 
seqq.,  Paris,  1675, 8vo,  with  a  dissertation  upon  Ptolemy ;  by  Teucher,  along 
with  Conon  and  Parthenius,  Leipzig,  1794,  8vo ;  and  by  Westermann,  in 
his  Mythographi,  p.  182,  seqq.,  Brunswick,  1843,  8vo. 

XL  ANTONINUS  LIBERALIS  ^AvTwvlvos  Ai£ep«A.ts),  a  Greek  grammarian, 
concerning  whose  life  nothing  is  known,  but  who  is  generally  believed  to 
have  lived  in  the  time  of  the  Antonines,  about  A.D.  147.  We  possess  a 
work  under  his  name,  entitled  MeTa/uop^wo-ewi/  ffwajcayfj,  and  consisting 
of  forty-one  tales  about  mythical  metamorphoses.  With  the  exception 
of  nine  tales,  he  always  mentions  the  sources  from  which  he  took  his 
accounts.  Since  most  of  the  works  referred  to  by  him  are  lost,  his  book 
is  of  some  importance  to  the  study  of  Greek  mythology,  but  in  regard  to 
composition  and  style  it  is  of  no  value.  There  are  but  very  few  manu 
scripts  of  this  work,  and  the  chief  are  that  at  Heidelberg  and  the  one  in 
Paris. 

The  first  edition  from  the  Heidelberg  MS.,  with  a  Latin  translation,  is  by  Xylander, 
Basle,  1568,  8vo.  There  is  a  good  edition  by  Verheyck,  Leyden,  1774,  8vo,  with  notes 
by  Muncker,  Hemsterhuis,  and  other  scholars.  The  best  edition,  however,  is  by  Koch, 
Leipzig,  1832,  8vo,  who  collated  the  Parts  MS.,  and  added  valuable  notes  of  his  own. 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  '  Id.  tb.,  s.  v. 


500  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


XII.  ATHEN^EUS  ('Aftrjvouos),1  called  by  Suidas  a  ypa/j./jia.TiK6s,  and  there 
fore  considered  under  the  present  head,  for  convenience'  sake,  since  he 
can  hardly  be  said  properly  to  belong  to  it.  He  was  a  native  of  Naucra- 
tis,  in  Egypt,  a  city  situate  on  the  left  side  of  the  Canopic  mouth  of  the 
Nile.  He  lived  about  A.D.  230,  first  at  Alexandrea,  and  afterward  at 
Rome.  His  extant  work  is  entitled  the  Deipnosophista,  i.  e.,  the  Banquet 
of  the  Learned,  or  else,  perhaps,  as  has  lately  been  suggested,  The  Con 
trivers  of  Feasts.  It  may  be  considered  one  of  the  earliest  collections  of 
what  are  called  Ana,  being  an  immense  mass  of  anecdotes,  extracts  from 
the  writings  of  poets,  historians,  dramatists,  philosophers,  orators,  and 
physicians,  of  facts  in  natural  history,  criticisms  and  discussions,  on  al 
most  every  conceivable  subject,  especially  on  gastronomy.  It  is,  in  short, 
a  collection  of  stories  from  the  memory  and  commonplace  book  of  a 
Greek  gentleman  of  the  third  century  of  our  era,  of  enormous  reading, 
extreme  love  of  good  eating,  and  respectable  ability.  Some  notion  of  the 
materials  which  he  had  amassed  for  the  work  may  be  formed  from  the 
fact,  which  he  tells  us  himself,  that  he  had  read  and  made  extracts  from 
eight  hundred  plays  of  the  middle  comedy  only. 

Athenaeus  represents  himself  as  describing  to  his  friend  Timocrates  a 
banquet  given  at  the  house  of  Laurentius  (AapV<rios),  a  noble  Roman,  to 
several  guests,  of  whom  the  best  known  are  Galen  the  physician,  and 
Ulpian  the  lawyer.  The  work  is  in  the  form  of  a  dialogue,  in  which  these 
guests  are  the  interlocutors,  related  to  Timocrates  —  a  double  machinery, 
which  would  have  been  inconvenient  to  an  author  who  had  a  real  talent 
for  dramatic  writing,  but  which,  in  the  hands  of  Athenaeus,  who  had  none, 
is  wholly  unmanageable.  As  a  work  of  art  the  failure  is  complete.  Unity 
of  time  and  dramatic  probability  are  utterly  violated  by  the  supposition 
that  so  immense  a  work  is  the  record  of  the  conversation  at  a  single 
banquet,  and  by  the  absurdity  of  collecting  at  it  the  produce  of  every  sea 
son  of  the  year.  Long  quotations  and  intricate  discussions,  introduced 
apropos  of  some  trifling  incident,  entirely  destroy  the  form  of  the  dia 
logue,  so  that  before  we  have  finished  a  speech  we  forget  who  was  the 
speaker.  But  as  a  work  illustrative  of  ancient  manners,  as  a  collection 
of  curious  facts,  names  of  authors,  and  fragments  which,  but  for  Athe 
naeus,  would  utterly  have  perished  ;  in  short,  as  a  body  of  amusing  anti 
quarian  research,  it  would  be  impossible  to  praise  the  Deipnosophistee  too 
highly. 

Among  the  authors  whose  works  are  now  lost,  from  whom  Athenaeus 
gives  extracts,  are  Alcaeus,  Agathon  the  tragic  poet,  Antisthenes  the 
philosopher,  Archilochus,  Menander,  Epimenides  of  Crete,  Empedocles 
of  Agrigentum,  Cratinus,  Eupolis,  Alcman,  Epicurus  (whom  he  repre 
sents  as  a  wasteful  glutton),  and  many  others  whose  names  are  well 
known.  In  all,  he  cites  nearly  eight  hundred  authors,  and  more  than 
twelve  hundred  separate  works.  Athenaeus  was  also  the  author  of  a  lost 
work,  Trepl  TWV  lv  Zvpia  fra.ffiXevffa.vrwv,  which  probably,  from  the  specimen 
of  it  in  the  Deipnosophista,  and  the  obvious  urtfitness  of  Athenaeus  to  be  an 
historian,  was  rather  a  collection  of  anecdotes  than  a  connected  history. 
1  Id.  ib.,  s.  v.  Compare  Edinburgh,  Review,  No.  5,  vol.  iii.,  p.  181,  seqq. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  501 

Of  the  Deipnosophista  the  first  two  books,  and  part  of  the  third,  eleventh, 
and  fifteenth,  exist  only  in  an  epitome,  the  date  and  author  of  which  are 
unknown.  The  original  work,  however,  was  rare  in  the  time  of  Eusta- 
thius  (the  latter  part  of  the  twelfth  century) ;  for  Bentley  has  shown,  by 
examining  nearly  a  hundred  of  his  references  to  Athenaeus,  that  his  only 
knowledge  of  him  was  through  the  epitome.  Perizonius  (in  his  preface  to 
JElian  quoted  by  Schweighaeuser )  has  proved  that  ^Elian  transferred 
large  portions  of  the  work  to  his  Various  History,  a  robbery  which  must 
have  been  committed  almost  in  the  lifetime  of  the  pillaged  author.  The 
Deipnosophista  also  furnished  to  Macrobius  the  idea  and  much  of  the  mat 
ter  of  his  Saturnalia  (end  of  fourth  century) ;  but  no  one  has  availed  him 
self  so  largely  of  Athenaeus's  erudition  as  Eustathius.1 

Only  one  original  manuscript  of  Athenaeus  now  exists,  called  by  Schweighaeuser  the 
Codex  Veneto-Parisiensis.  From  this  all  the  others  which  we  now  possess  are  copies  ; 
so  that  the  text  of  the  work,  especially  in  the  poetical  parts,  is  in  a  very  unsettled  state. 
The  MS.  was  brought  from  Greece  by  Cardinal  Bessarion,  and,  after  his  death,  was 
placed  in  the  library  of  St.  Mark  at  Venice,  whence  it  was  taken  to  Paris  by  order  of  Na 
poleon,  and  there  for  the  first  time  collated  by  Schweighaeuser's  son.  It  is  probably  of 
the  date  of  the  tenth  century.  The  subscript  iota  is  always  placed  after,  instead  of  un 
der,  the  vowel  with  which  it  is  connected,  and  the  whole  is  written  without  contractions. 
The  first  edition  of  Athenaeus  was  that  of  Aldus,  Venice,  1514  ;  a  second  was  published 
at  Basle,  1535 ;  a  third  by  Casaubon,  at  Geneva,  1597,  with  the  Latin  version  of  Dale- 
champ,  and  a  commentary  published  in  1600 ;  a  fourth  by  Schweighaeuser,  Strasburg, 
14  vols.  8vo,  1801-1807,  founded  on  a  collation  of  the  above-mentioned  MS.,  and  also  of 
a  valuable  copy  of  the  epitome ;  a  fifth  by  W.  Dindorf,  3  vols.  8vo,  Leipzig,  1827.  The 
last  is  the  best,  Schweighaeuser  not  having  availed  himself  sufficiently  of  the  sagacity 
of  previous  critics  in  amending  the  text,  and  being  himself  apparently  very  ignorant  of 
metrical  laws. 


CHAPTER  XL VIII. 
SIXTH  OR  ROMAN  PERIOD— continued. 

PHILOSOPHERS. 
INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS.2 

I.  THE  Romans,  a  nation  of  warriors  and  conquerors,  with  whom  the 
interests  of  their  republic  outweighed  all  others,  became  acquainted  with 
Grecian  philosophy,  particularly  with  the  Peripatetic,  Academic,  and  Stoic 
doctrines,  only  after  the  conquest  of  Greece ;  and  more  especially  through 
the  intervention  of  the  three  philosophers  whom  the  Athenians  sent  to 
Rome,  and  of  whom  we  have  already  made  mention.     In  spite  of  determ 
ined  prejudices  and  reiterated  denunciations,  one  of  these  doctrines  (that 
of  the  Academy)  daily  gained  disciples  there,  especially  when  Lucullus 
and  Sulla  had  enriched  the  Capitol  with  the  libraries  of  the  conquered. 
The  latter,  after  the  capture  of  Athens,  84  B.C.,  sent  thither  the  collec 
tion  of  Apellicon,  which  was  particularly  rich  in  the  works  of  Aristotle. 

II.  The  spirit  of  research  in  Grecian  philosophy,  once  so  original  and 
independent,  was  now,  however,  exhausted.     Reason  had  tried  every 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.    Compare  Edinburgh  Review,  No.  5,  vol.  iii.,  p.  181,  seqq. 

2  Tennemann's  Manual  of  Philosophy,  ed.  Morell,  p.  148,  seqq. 


502  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

path,  every  direction  then  open  to  her,  without  being  able  to  satisfy  her 
self;  for  she  had  not  penetrated  to  the  fundamental  problem,  that  of  the 
nature  of  reason,  and  consequently  had  continued  an  enigma  to  herself. 
The  different  philosophic  systems  had  viewed  truth  only  in  one  of  its  as 
pects,  and  consequently  were  involved  in  errors. 

III.  Indeed,  the  political,  religious,  and  moral  condition  of  the  Roman 
empire,  during  the  first  centuries  after  the  Christian  era,  was  not  such 
as  to  animate  and  sustain  a  spirit  of  philosophic  research.     Greece  had 
lost  her  political  existence;   Rome  her  republican  Constitution.     The 
characteristic  features  of  the  period  were  a  neglect  of  the  popular  re 
ligion,  a  preference  for  foreign  rites  (of  which  an  incongruous  medley 
was  tolerated),  a  widely  prevalent  superstition,  a  disdain  of  what  wras 
natural,  a  mania  for  what  was  strange  and  extraordinary,  a  curious  pry 
ing  into  the  (pretended)  occult  arts,  with  an  extinction  of  all  sentiments 
truly  great  and  noble. 

IV.  Nevertheless,  philosophy  made  at  least  some  apparent  progress  in 
extension  and,  at  least  apparently,  in  intensity.     In  extension,  because 
the  Romans  and  the  Jews  by  this  time  had  made  themselves  acquainted 
with  the  philosophical  dogmas  of  the  Greeks,  and  had  produced  some 
philosophical  works  sufficiently  original.     Nor  does  this  progress  of  phi 
losophy  appear  to  have  been  merely  external,  inasmuch  as  skepticism  had 
assumed  a  more  intense  character,  and  gave  occasion  for  a  fresh  dog 
matical  system  in  the  school  of  the  Platonists.     By  imagining  a  new 
source  of  knowledge,  the  intuition  of  the  absolute  ;  by  laboring  to  com 
bine  the  old  and  the  new  theories  of  the  East  and  the  West,  they  endeavor 
ed  to  provide  a  broader  basis  for  dogmatic  philosophy,  to  prop  up  the  estab 
lished  religion,  and  to  oppose  a  barrier  to  the  rapid  progress  of  Christian 
ity,  but  eventually  lost  themselves  in  the  region  of  metaphysical  dreams. 

V.  We  will  now  proceed  to  consider  the  different  schools,  and  to  no 
tice  the  Greek  writers  who  have  distinguished  themselves  therein. 

I.     EPICUREAN     SCHOOL.1 

I.  The  doctrine  of  Epicurus,  when  first  disseminated  in  their  country, 
attracted  among  the  Romans  a  crowd  of  partisans,  in  consequence  of  its 
light  and  accommodating  character,  and  the  indulgence  it  afforded  to  the 
inclinations  of  all ;  as,  also,  because  it  had  the  effect  of  disengaging  the 
mind  from  superstitious  terrors.     Very  few  of  the  Roman  Epicureans 
distinguished  themselves  by  a  truly  philosophical  character ;   and  even 
these  adhered  literally  to  the  doctrines  of  their  master,  without  advancing 
a  step  beyond  them.     Such,  among  others,  was  the  Roman  Lucretius, 
who  gave  a  statement  of  those  doctrines  in  his  didactic  poem  "  De  Rerum 
Natura." 

II.  The  principal  Greek  writers  belonging  to  this  school,  during  the 
period  which  we  are  considering,  were  Cclsus  and  Diogenes  Laertius. 

III.  CELSUS,S  the  adversary  of  Christianity,  to  whom  Origen  replies, 
though  in  his  attack  he  sometimes  makes  use  of  Platonic  and  Stoic  weap 
ons,  is  expressly  ranked  by  Lucian,  as  well  as  Origen,  among  the  follow- 

1  Tennemann,  p.  153,  seqq.  a  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  503 

ers  of  Epicurus  ;  and  this  supposition  best  accounts  for  the  violence  with 
which  he  opposed  the  Christian  religion ;  for  an  Epicurean  would,  of 
course,  reject  without  examination  all  pretensions  to  divine  communica 
tions  or  powers.  The  extracts  from  his  writings  preserved  by  Origen, 
at  the  same  time  that  they  prove  him  to  have  been  an  inveterate  enemy 
to  Christianity,  show  that  he  was  not  destitute  of  learning  or  ability. 
Celsus,  besides  his  book  against  the  Christians,  wrote  a  piece  entitled 
"Precepts  of  Living  Well,"  and  another  "Against  Magic,"  but  none  of 
his  writings  are  extant,  except  the  quotations  made  by  Origen.  Celsus 
was  born  toward  the  close  of  Hadrian's  reign,  and  was  contemporary 
with  Lucian  under  M.  Aurelius  Antoninus. 

IV.  DIOGENES  LAERTIUS,  of  whom  mention  has  already  been  made,  is 
also  ranked  among  the  followers  of  Epicurus.  His  predilection,  indeed, 
for  Epicureanism  is  shown  in  the  extraordinary  pains  he  has  taken  to 
give  an  accurate  summary  of  the  doctrine  of  Epicurus,  and  a  full  detail 
of  his  life. 

II.    STOIC     SCHOOL.1 

I.  Next  to  those  of  Epicurus'  the  doctrines  of  the  Stoics  obtained  the 
greatest  success  at  Rome,  especially  among  men  of  a  severer  character, 
who  had  devoted  their  lives  to  public  affairs.     With  such  men,  the  Stoic 
philosophy,  being  more  closely  applied  to  real  life,  and  exercising  a 
marked  influence  over  legislation  and  the  administration  of  the  laws, 
naturally  acquired  a  more  practical  spirit,  and  began  to  disengage  itself, 
in  some  degree,  from  speculative  subtleties. 

II.  But,  notwithstanding  the  general  credit  which  the  Stoic  doctrine 
obtained,  it  met  with  powerful  opposition  from  several  quarters,  particu 
larly  from  the  Skeptics,  who  were  indefatigable  in  their  endeavors  to 
overturn  every  dogmatic  system  ;  and  from  the  Alexandrean  sect,  which, 
by  its  destructive  plan  of  coalition,  corrupted  the  genuine  doctrine  of  ev 
ery  other  school.     From  the  period  when  the  motley  Eclectic  system 
was  established,  Stoicism  began  to  decline  ;  and  in  the  age  of  Augustine 
it  no  longer  subsisted  as  a  distinct  sect.     It  was  only  during  the  short 
space  of  two  hundred  years  that  the  Roman  school  of  Zeno  was  adorned 
with  illustrious  names,  which  claim  a  place  in  the  history  of  philosophy. 
Such  the,  ATHENODORUS  of  Tarsus,  who  flourished  about  the  time  of 
Christ ;  CH^EREMON  of  Egypt,  who  was  one  of  the  preceptors  of  Nero  ; 
EUPHRATES  of  Tyre,  or,  according  to  others,  of  Byzantium,  an  intimate 
friend  of  the  younger  Pliny;  Dio  CHRYSOSTOM,  already  mentioned  ;  EPIC- 
TETUS,  ARRIAN,  of  whom  we  have  already  spoken,  and  the  philosophic 
emperor,  MARCUS  AURELIUS  ANTONINUS. 

III.  EPICTETUS  ('Eiri/cTTjros),2  of  Hierapolis,  in  Phrygia,  was  a  freedman 
of  Epaphroditus,  who  was  himself  a  freedman  of  Nero.     He  lived  and 
taught  first  at  Rome,  and,  after  the  expulsion  of  the  philosophers  by  Do- 
mitian,  at  Nicopolis,  in  Epirus.     Although  he  was  favored  by  Hadrian, 
he  does  not  appear  to  have  returned  to  Rome,  for  the  discourses  which 
Arrian  took  down  in  writing  were  delivered  by  Epictetus  when  an  old 

>  Tennemann,  p.  154.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  v. 


504 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


man  at  JNicopolis.  Only  a  few  circumstances  of  his  life  are  recorded, 
such  as  his  lameness,  which  is  spoken  of  in  various  ways,  his  poverty, 
and  his  few  wants.  Epictetus  did  not  leave  any  works  behind  him,  and 
the  short  manual  (Enchiridion)  which  bears  his  name  was  compiled  from 
his  discourses  by  his  faithful  pupil  Arrian.  Arrian  also  wrote  out  the 
philosophical  lectures  of  his  master  in  eight  books,  from  which,  though 
four  are  lost,  we  are  enabled  to  gain  a  complete  idea  of  the  way  in  which 
Epictetus  conceived  and  taught  the  Stoic  philosophy.  Being  deeply  im 
pressed  with  his  vocation  as  a  teacher,  he  aimed  in  his  discourses  at 
nothing  else  but  winning  the  minds  of  his  hearers  to  that  which  was 
good,  and  no  one  was  able  to  resist  the  impression  which  they  produced. 
Epictetus  gave  up  the  proud  self-sufficiency  which  the  Stoic  philosopher 
was  expected  to  show  in  his  relation  to  the  vicissitudes  of  the  world  and 
of  man.  The  maxim  "  suffer  and  abstain1''  (from  evil),  which  he  followed 
throughout  life,  was  based  with  him  upon  the  firm  belief  in  a  wise  and 
benevolent  government  of  Providence  ;  and  in  this  respect  he  approaches 
the  Christian  doctrine  more  than  any  of  the  earlier  Stoics,  though  there 
is  not  a  trace  in  the  Epictetea  to  show  that  he  was  acquainted  with  Chris 
tianity,  and,  still  less,  that  he  had  adopted  Christianity,  either  in  part  or 
entirely. 

IV.  ANTONINUS,  MARCUS  AuRELius,1  the  philosophic  emperor,  was  dis 
tinguished  for  his  devotion  to  philosophy  and  literature.  When  only 
twelve  years  old,  he  adopted  the  dress  and  practiced  the  austerities  of  the 
Stoics,  whose  doctrines  were  imparted  to  him  by  the  most  celebrated 
teachers  of  the  day — Diognotus,  Apollonius,  and  Junius  Rusticus.  The 
principles  of  composition  and  oratory  he  studied  under  Herodes  Atticus 
and  Cornelius  Fronto.  While  yet  Caesar,  he  was  addressed  by  Justin  Mar 
tyr  as  Verissimus  "  the  philosopher,'f  an  epithet  by  which  he  has  been  com- 
moply  distinguished  from  that  period  down  to  the  present  day,  although 
no  such  title  was  ever  publicly  or  formally  conferred.  Even  after  his 
elevation  to  the  purple,  he  felt  neither  reluctance  nor  shame  in  resorting 
to  the  school  of  Sextus  of  Chzeronea,  the  descendant  of  Plutarch,  and 
in  listening  to  the  extemporaneous  declamations  of  Hermogenes.  With 
the  exception  of  a  few  letters,  contained  in  the  recently  discovered  re 
mains  of  Fronto,  the  only  production  of  Marcus  Aurelius  which  has  been 
preserved  is  a  volume  composed  in  Greek,  and  entitled  MdpKov  'Avrwvivov 
rov  avTOKparopos  roav  fls  eavrb»>  ftifi\ia  iff,  "  Twelve  Books  of  the  Meditations 
of  the  Emperor  Marcus  Antoninus.'1''  It  is  a  sort  of  commonplace  book, 
in  which  were  registered,  from  time  to  time,  the  thoughts  and  feelings 
of  the  author  upon  moral  and  religious  topics,  together  with  striking  max 
ims  extracted  from  the  works  of  those  who  had  been  most  eminent  for 
wisdom  and  virtue.  There  is  no  attempt  at  order  or  arrangement,  but 
the  contents  are  valuable  in  so  far  as  they  illustrate  the  system  of  self- 
examinatien  enjoined  by  the  discipline  of  the  Stoics,  and  present  a  genu 
ine  picture  of  the  doubts,  and  difficulties,  and  struggles  of  a  speculative 
and  reflecting  mind. 
The  edilio  princeps  of  the  Meditations  was  published  by  Xylander,  Zurich,  1558,  8vo, 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  505 

and  republished,  with  improvements,  by  the  same  scholar  ten  years  afterward,  Basle, 
1568,  8vo.  The  next  in  order  was  superintended  by  Merick  Casaubon,  London,  1643, 
8vo,  followed  by  the  edition  of  Gataker,  Cambridge,  1652,  4to,  reprinted  at  London,  1'679, 
with  additional  notes  from  the  French  of  And.  Dacier,  and  his  life  of  M.  Aurelius,  trans 
lated  into  Latin  by  Stanhope.  There  are  also  editions  by  Wolle,  Leipzig,  1729,  8vo ; 
Morus,  Leipzig,  1775,  8vo ;  and  Schultz  (containing  a  new  recension  of  the  text),  Sles- 
wick,  1802,  8vo.  This  last,  however,  is  still  imperfect,  only  one  volume  having  appeared. 
The  edition  of  Gataker  (the  London  reprint)  is,  upon  the  whole,  the  most  useful  and  ample. 


III.     PERIPATETIC     SCHOOL.1 

I.  The  philosophy  of  Aristotle  was  not  suited  to  the  practical  character 
of  the  Roman  mind,  and  such  as  devoted  themselves  to  the  study  of  it 
became  mere  commentators  of  various  merit  or  demerit.     We  must  ac 
count  as  peripatetics  CRATIPPUS,  of  Mytilene,  whom  Cicero  the  younger, 
and  several  other  Romans,  attended  at  Athens ;  NICOLAUS  DAMASCENUS. 
already  mentioned  by  us  among  the  historical  writers ;  XENARCHUS,  of 
Seleucia,  who,  as  well  as  the  preceding,  gave  lessons  in  the  time  of  Au 
gustus  ;  ALEXANDER,  of  .^Egae,  one  of  the  preceptors  of  Nero  ;  and  more 
especially  the  celebrated  commentator  ALEXANDER,  of  Aphrodisias,  whom 
we  shall  proceed  briefly  to  notice. 

II.  ALEXANDER,2  of  Aphrodisias,  in  Caria,  the  most  celebrated  of  the 
commentators  on  Aristotle,  and  hence  called,  by  way  of  eminence,  6 
e|rj77jT^s,  or  "the  commentator,"  lived  about  A.D.  200.     He  taught  at 
Alexandrea,  and  founded  a  special  exegetical  school  which  bore  his 
name,  his  followers  being  called  Alexandreans  and  Alexandrists.     In  his 
work  "  On  the  Soul,"  he  departed  from  Aristotle,  and  taught  that  the 
soul  is  not  a  special  substance  (ofon'a),  but  simply  a  form  of  the  organized 
body  (flS6s  n  rov  (rcafiaros  bpyaviKov),  and  consequently,  that  it  could  not 
be  immortal ;  and  in  his  treatise  "  On  Destiny,"  he  attacked  the  fatalism 
of  the  Stoics,  which  he  declared  irreconcilable  with  morality.    If  we  view 
him  as  a  philosopher,  his  merit  can  not  be  rated  too  highly.     His  excel 
lences  and  defects  are  all  on  the  model  of  his  great  master  ;  there  is  the 
same  perspicuity  and  power  of  analysis,  united  with  almost  more  than 
Aristotelian  plainness  of  style.    About  half  of  his  voluminous  works  were 
edited  and  translated  into  Latin  at  the  revival  of  literature.     There  are 
a  few  more  extant  in  the  original  Greek,  which  have  never  been  printed, 
and  an  Arabic  version  is  preserved  of  several  others.     His  most  import 
ant  treatise  is  that  "  On  Destiny,"  mentioned  above,  the  best  edition  of 
which  is  that  by  Orelli,  Zurich,  1824,  8vo. 

IV.     NEW     PYTHAGOREAN     SCHOOL.3 

I.  Pythagoras,  whose  reputation,  and  even  whose  philosophy  had  long 
been  familiar  to  the  Romans,  had,  at  the  period  of  which  we  are  treat 
ing,  a  large  number  of  followers  ;  his  exemplary  life,  and  still  more,  the 
mysterious  character  of  his  history  and  his  doctrines,  being  the  principal 
causes  of  the  species  of  enthusiastic  reverence  with  which  he  was  re 
garded. 

II.  To  the  New  Pythagoreans  we  may  refer  EUXENUS,  of  Heraclea 
i  Tennemann,  p.  158.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Tennemann,  p.  159. 

Y 


506  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Pontica  ;  APOLLONIUS,  of  Tyana,  in  Cappadocia,  his  pupil,  of  whom  we 
have  already  spoken  in  our  account  of  Philostratus  ;  and  SECUNDUS,  of 
Athens,  about  120  A.D.  Others,  for  instance  ANAXILAUS,  of  Larissa,  who 
flourished  under  Augustus,  and  was  banished  from  Italy  on  a  charge  of 
magical  practices,  applied  the  principles  of  Pythagoras  to  the  study  of 
nature  ;  or,  like  MODERATUS,  of  Gades,  who  flourished  in  the  time  of  Nero, 
and  NICOMACHUS,  of  Gerasa,  endeavored  to  discover  in  the  Pythagorean 
doctrine  of  numbers  a  sublime  and  occult  science,  which  they  blended 
with  the  theories  of  Plato.  Nicomachus  must  be  assigned  to  the  reign 
of  Tiberius.  He  wrote  a  Life  of  Pythagoras,  now  lost,  and  composed 
works  also  on  Arithmetic  and  Music. 

The  extant  works  of  Nicomachus  are,  1.  "Apt0/i«)TiK7}s  elsaywyi}?  |3i/3A.ta  /3',  forming 
what  is  called  the  lesser  work  on  Arithmetic,  the  larger  one  being  lost.  It  was  printed 
by  Wechel  (Gr.),  Paris,  1538,  4to;  also  after  the  Theologumena  Arithmetics,  attributed 
to  lamblichus,  Leipzig,  1817,  8vo.  2.  'Eyxeipi&tov  apjuoviK^s  (SijSAia  ft',  a  work  on  Music, 
first  printed  (Gr.)  by  Meursius  in  his  collection,  Leyden,  1616,  4to,  and  afterward  in  the 
collection  of  Meibomius  (Gr.  and  Lat.),  Amsterdam,  1652,  4to ;  and  again  in  the  works 
of  Meursius,  by  Lami,  Florence,  1745,  fol. 

V.     ECLECTIC     ACADEMICS.1 

I.  In  the  time  of  Augustus  a  new  school  of  Platonists  began  to  form 
itself,  and  became  popular.     The  philosophers  of  this  school  made  it 
their  object  to  disseminate  in  a  popular  form  the  ethics  and  religious 
theory  of  Plato,  and  constructed  for  themselves  a  system  of  allegorical 
interpretation,  which  connected  the  doctrines  of  that  system  with  the  an 
cient  religious  mysteries.    With  this  they  blended  much  that  was  derived 
from  the  Pythagoreans  and  Aristotle,  and,  in  the  dogmatic  manner,  pur 
sued  the  most  lofty  speculations  (the  outline  of  wrhich  had  been  traced  in 
the  treatises  of  Plato),  on  the  Deity,  the  Creator,  the  Soul  of  the  World, 
the  Demons,  the  Origin  of  the  World,  and  that  of  Evil.     They  supposed 
our  conceptions  to  have  a  hypostatical  existence,  and  applied  their  ab 
stract  principles  to  account  for  phenomena  of  their  own  days ;  for  in 
stance,  the  cessation  of  oracles. 

II.  Among  the  philosophers  of  this  school  may  be  mentioned  THRASYL- 
LUS,  of  Mendes,  the  astrologer,  in  the  time  of  Tiberius;  THEON,  of  Smyr 
na,  the  author  of  an  exposition  of  Plato,  and  also  a  mathematical  writer, 
who  lived  in  the  time  of  Hadrian  ;  ALCINOUS,  who  has  left  us  a  brief  sketch 
of  the  Platonic  doctrine  ;  ALBINUS,  of  Smyrna,  the  preceptor  of  Galen, 
and  who  has  left  us  an  introduction  to  the  dialogues  of  Plato  ;  PLUTARCH, 
of  Chaeronea,  already  mentioned,  and  MAXIMUS  TYRIUS,  the  rhetorician, 
of  whom  also  we  have  already  treated. 

Of  Theon,  of  Smyrna,  all  that  we  have  left  is  a  portion  of  a  work  entitled  TS»v  KO.TO. 
/xedty/uaTiKV  wt)<rit*.u>v  eis  TTJI/  rov  IIXaTtovos  avdyv<a<TLV.  The  portion  which  now  exists 
is  in  two  books,  one  on  Arithmetic,  and  one  on  Music.  There  was  a  third  on  Astrono 
my  ;  and  a  fourth,  ntpl  rfc  tv  KOO>KJ>  ap/noi'ias.  The  best  edition  is  by  Gelder,  Leyden, 
1827,  8vo.  Of  the  Epitome  of  Alcinous  we  have  an  edition  by  Fell,  Oxford,  1667,  and 
another  by  Fischer,  Leipzig,  1783,  8vo.  The  Introduction  of  Albinus  is  given  in  Fabri- 
cius,  Bibl.  Grcec.,  vol.  ii.,  old  edition.  It  is  also  prefixed  to  Etwall's  edition  of  three  dia 
logues  of  Plato,  Oxford,  1771,  and  to  Fischer's  four  dialogues  of  Plato,  Leipzig,  1783,  8vo. 

1  Tenncmann,  p.  161. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  507 

VI.     SKEPTICISM     OF     THE     EMPIRIC     SCHOOL.1 

I.  ^ENEsiDEMus,2  a  native  of  Cnosus,  in  Crete,  and  who  lived  probably 
a  little  later  than  Cicero,  settled  in  Alexandrea,  and  revived  the  skep 
ticism  which  had  been  silenced  in  the  Academy,  wishing  to  make  it  serve 
the  purpose  of  strengthening  the  opinions  of  Heraclitus,  to  which  he  was 
inclined ;   for,  in  order  to  know  that  every  thing  has  its  contrary,  he 
maintained  that  we  ought  to  admit  that  an  opposite  is  presented  to  each 
and  the  same  individual.     He  assumed  an  external  principle  of  thought, 
making  truth  to  consist  in  the  universality  of  the  subjective  appearance. 
The  boldest  attack  made  by  any  of  the  ancient  philosophers  on  the  possi 
bility  of  demonstrative  knowledge,  was  that  attempted  by  JEnesidemus 
against  the  reality  of  the  idea  of  causality.     He  argued  that  the  notion 
of  causality  is  without  signification,  because  we  can  not  understand  the 
relations  of  cause  and  effect. 

II.  From  the  time  of  JSnesidemus  to  that  of  SEXTUS  EMPIRICUS  follow 
ed  a  succession  of  skeptics,  all  of  them  physicians  of  the  Empiric  and 
Methodic  schools,  who  confined  themselves  to  the  observation  of  facts, 
and  rejected  all  theory  respecting  the  causes  of  maladies. 

III.  SEXTUS  EMPIRICUS'  was  a  physician,  and  received  his  name  Em- 
piricus  from  his  belonging  to  the  school  of  the  Empirici.     He  was  a  con 
temporary  of  Galen,  and  lived  in  the  first  half  of  the  third  century  of  the 
Christian  era.     Nothing  is  known  of  his  life.     He  put  the  finishing  hand 
to  the  philosophy  of  doubt.    While  he  availed  himself  of  the  works  of  his 
predecessors,  especially  ^Enesidemus,  he  contributed  much  to  define  the 
object,  end,  and  method  of  skepticism.    Two  of  his  works  are  extant.    1. 
nvfydviai  "firoTinraxreis  r)  crKfirriKa.  inro/J.vf]naTa,  containing  the  doctrines  of 
the  Skeptics,  in  three  books.    2.  Upbs  rovs  fj-aO-n^ariKovs  curififaTiKai,  against 
the  Mathematics  in  eleven  books.     This  is  an  attack  upon  all  positive 
philosophy.     The  first  six  books  are  a  refutation  of  the  six  sciences  of 
grammar,  rhetoric,  geometry,  arithmetic,  astrology,  and  music.     The  re 
maining  five  books  are  directed  against  logicians,  natural  philosophers, 
and  ethical  writers,  and  form,  in  fact,  a  distinct  work,  which  may  be  viewed 
.as  belonging  to  the  "rvorvTrdxreis.    The  two  works  are  a  great  repository 
of  doubts.     The  language  is  as  clear  and  perspicuous  as  the  subject  will 
allow. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Greek  text  of  both  works  was  that  of  Paris,  1621,  fol.  The 
second  edition  was  that  of  Fabricius,  Leipzig,  1718,  fol.,  containing  the  Latin  version 
which  had  appeared  before  the  first  publication  of  the  Greek  text,  and  also  some  emenda 
tions.  A  reimpression  of  this  latter  edition  appeared  at  Leipzig,  1842,  2  vols.  8vo.  A 
new  edition,  with  an  amended  text,  was  published  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1842. 

VII.     NEO-PLATONISTS.* 

I.  Neo-Platonism  had  its  origin  in  the  much-frequented  school  of  the 
Platonists  at  Alexandrea,  and  was  characterized  by  an  ardent  and  en 
thusiastic  zeal.  Its  disciples  aspired  to  attain  unto  the  highest  pinnacles 
of  science,  to  acquire  a  knowlege  of  the  absolute,  and  an  intimate  union 
i  Tennemann,  p.  163.  2  Smitk,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Id.  ib.  *  Tennemann,  p.  177- 


508  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


is)  therewith  as  the  final  end  of  man's  being.    The  way  thereto  they 
held  to  be  the  intuition  of  the  absolute  (&e«pia). 

II.  The  principal  causes  which  led  to  this  new  system  were,  the  de 
cline  of  genuine  Grecian  philosophy,  and  the  admixture  with  its  remains 
of  the  theories  of  the  East,  added  to  a  continually-increasing  attachment 
to  Oriental  exaggeration  and  enthusiasm,  which  they  confirmed  by  fre 
quent  appeals  to  celestial  revelations,  while  they  depreciated  the  merit 
of  Plato  as  a  philosopher.     The  prevailing  spirit  of  the  age,  and  the  de 
cline  of  the  Roman  empire,  contributed  to  this.     To  these  may  be  added 
two  other  causes  :  the  opposition  which  the  skeptics  of  the  new  school 
continually  made  to  all  pretensions  to  rational  knowledge,  and  the  alarm 
which  the  victorious  progress  of  Christianity  occasioned  to  the  defenders 
of  the  old  religion,  lest  it  should  be  utterly  overthrown. 

III.  The  importance  which  Platonism  assumed  in  this  conflict  between 
Christianity  and  polytheism,  added  to  the  daily-increasing  influence  of 
Oriental  notions,  caused  that  philosophy  to  assume  a  fresh  distinction, 
its  ardent  character  being  aided  by  the  scientific  turn  of  the  Greeks,  and 
heightened  by  the  admixture  of  many  other  doctrines.     PHILO  JUD^EUS, 
NUMENIUS,  and  ATTICUS  had  already  given  specimens  of  this  sort  of  mys 
tical  speculation,  and  association  of  Oriental  ideas  with  those  of  the  Pla- 
tonists.     The  same  is  observable  in  the  writings  of  many  of  the  Greek 
fathers  of  the  Church  ;  JUSTIN,  for  instance,  CLEMENS  of  Alexandrea,  and 
ORIGEN,  who  not  unfrequently  Platonize.     The  true  founder  of  the  Neo- 
Platonic  school,  however,  was  AMMONIUS  SACCAS,  who  ranked  among  his 
pupils  LONGINUS,  the  celebrated  critic,  PLOTINUS,  ORIGEN,  and  HERENNIUS. 
We  will  now  proceed  to  give  a  brief  sketch  of  some  of  these,  and  other 
Platonists  of  the  time. 

1.  PHILO  Juo^Eus,1  or  Philo  the  Jew,  was  born  at  Alexandrea,  and  was 
descended  from  a  priestly  family  of  distinction.  He  had  already  reached 
an  advanced  age  when  he  went  to  Rome  (A.D.  40),  on  an  embassy  to 
the  Emperor  Caligula,  in  order  to  procure  the  revocation  of  the  decree 
which  exacted  from  the  Jews  divine  homage  to  the  statue  of  the  emperor. 
We  have  no  other  particulars  of  the  life  of  Philo  worthy  of  record.  His 
most  important  works  treat  of  the  books  of  Moses,  and  are  generally  cited 
under  different  titles.  His  great  object  was  to  reconcile  the  sacred  Scrip 
tures  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Greek  philosophy,  and  to  point  out  the 
conformity  between  the  two.  He  maintained  that'the  fundamental  truths 
of  the  Greek  philosophy  were  derived  from  the  Mosaic  revelation,  and,  in 
order  to  make  the  latter  agree  more  perfectly  with  the  former,  he  had  re 
course  to  an  allegorical  interpretation  of  the  books  of  Moses.  On  the 
other  hand,  he  transferred  into  his  system  of  Platonic  philosophy  many 
of  the  opinions  of  the  East,  in  return  for  those  which  he  borrowed  from 
Plato.  Hence,  in  strictness,  he  may  be  considered  as  the  first  Neo-Pla- 
tonist  of  Alexandrea,  though,  as  before  remarked,  the  regular  founder  of 
that  school  was  Ammonius  Saccas. 

To  the  treatises  of  Philo  contained  in  the  earlier  editions  have  recently  been  added 
not  only  those  found  by  Mai  in  a  Florentine  MS.  (Milan,  1818),  but  also  the  treatises  dis- 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  t.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  509 

covered  by  Aucher  in  an  Armenian  version,  and  translated  into  Latin  (Venice,  1822,  fol. 
min.  ;  ibid.,  1826).  The  best  edition  of  Philo  is  the  splendid  one  of  Mangey,  London, 
1742,  2  vols.  fol.  Still,  without  detracting  from  its  merits,  it  is  far  from  complete  ;  and 
how  much  remains  to  be  done  in  order  to  make  a  really  good  edition,  was  shown  by 
Valckenaer,  Ruhnken,  Markland,  and  others,  at  an  earlier  period,  and  more  recently  by 
Creuzer  (Zur  Kritik  der  Schriften  des  Juden  Philo,  in  "Ullmann's  and  Umbreit's  Theolo- 
gischen  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1832,  p.  i.,  seqq.).  The  edition  of  Pfeiffer,  Erlangen,  1785- 
92,  5  vols.  8vo,  contributed  but  little  to  the  correction  of  the  text,  and  that  of  Richter, 
Leipzig,  1828-30,  8  vols.  12mo,  is  little  more  than  a  reprint  of  Mangey's,  including  the 
pieces  discovered  in  the  mean  time. 


2.  NUMENIUS  (Nou/urji/ios)  of  Apamea,  in  Syria,  was  highly  esteemed  by 
Plotinus  and  his  school,  as  well  as  by  Origen.     He  probably  belongs  to 
the  age  of  the  Antonines.    His  object  was  to  trace  the  doctrines  of  Plato 
up  to  Pythagoras,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to  show  that  they  were  not  at 
variance  with  the  dogmas  and  mysteries  of  the  Brahmins,  Jews,  Magi, 
and  Egyptians.     Considerable  fragments  of  his  works  have  been  pre 
served  by  Eusebius. 

3.  JUSTINUS  (  'lova-Tti'os  ),*  surnamed  the  MARTYR  (6  Moprus),  or  the 
PHILOSOPHER  (6  ^t\6ffo(f>os),  one  of  the  earliest  of  the  Christian  writers, 
was  a  native  of  Flavia  Neapolis,  or  the  New  City  of  Flavia,  which  arose 
out  of  the  ruins,  and  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  ancient  town  called 
Shechem  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  Sychar  in  the  New.     He  was  born 
about  A.D.  103.     Justin  was  brought  up  as  a  heathen,  and  in  his  youth 
studied  the  Greek  philosophy  with  zeal  and  ardor.     He  was  afterward 
converted  to  Christianity.     He  retained  as  a  Christian  the  garb  of  a  phi 
losopher,  but  devoted  himself  to  the  propagation,  by  writing  and  other 
wise,  of  the  faith  which  he  had  embraced.     He  was  put  to  death  at 
Rome,  in  the  persecution  under  Marcus  Aurelius,  about  165  A.D.     Jus 
tin  wrote  a  large  number  of  works  in  Greek,  several  of  which  have  come 
down  to  us.     Of  these  the  most  important  are,  1.  An  Apology  for  the 
Christians,  addressed  to  Antoninus  Pius,  about  A.D.  139.     2.  A  Second 
Apology  for  the  Christians,  addressed  to  the  emperors  M.  Aurelius  and  L. 
Verus.     3.  A  Dialogue  with  Tryphon  the  Jew,  in  which  Justin  defends 
Christianity  against  the  objections  of  Tryphon. 

The  best  edition  of  the  collected  works  of  Justin  is  by  Otto,  Jena,  1  842-44,  2  vols.  8vo  ; 
second  edition,  Jena,  1848-50,  3  vols.  8vo. 

4.  CLEMENS  ALEXANDRINUS,S  so   called  from  his  long  residence   at 
Alexandrea,  was  a  native  of  Athens.     His  full  name  was  T.  Flavius 
Clemens.     In  early  life  he  was  ardently  devoted  to  the  study  of  philos 
ophy,  and  his  thirst  for  knowledge  led  him  to  visit  various  countries, 
such  as  Greece,  Southern  Italy,  Gale-Syria,  Palestine,  and  Egypt.     His 
philosophical  studies  had  a  great  influence  upon  his  views  of  Christianity. 
He  embraced  Christianity  through  the  teaching  of  Pantaenus,  at  Alex 
andrea,  was  ordained  presbyter  about  A.D.  190,  and  died  about  A.D.  220. 
Hence  he  flourished  during  the  reigns  of  Severus  and  Caracalla,  A.D. 
193-217.     His  three  principal  works  constitute  parts  of  a  whole.     In 
the  Hortatory  Address  to  the  Greeks  (Afyos  npoTpeTm/eJs,  &c.),  his  design 
was  to  convince  the  heathens,  and  to  convert  them  to  Christianity.    The 

l  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.v.  2  Id.  ib. 


510  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

Pedagogue  (Hai5ayuy6s)  takes  up  the  new  convert  at  the  point  to  which 
he  is  supposed  to  have  heen  brought  by  the  hortatory  address,  and  fur 
nishes  him  with  rules  for  the  regulation  of  his  conduct.  The  Stromata 
C^rpuiJLarCis)  are  in  eight  books.  The  title  means  "  Patchwork,-'  and  indi 
cates  its  miscellaneous  character.  It  is  rambling  and  discursive,  but 
contains  much  valuable  information  on  many  points  of  antiquity,  particu 
larly  the  history  of  philosophy.  The  principal  information  respecting 
Egyptian  hieroglyphics  is  contained  in  the  fifth  book.  The  object  of  the 
work  was  to  delineate  the  perfect  Christian  or  Gnostic,  after  he  had  been 
instructed  by  the  Teacher,  and  thus  prepared  by  sublime  speculations  in 
philosophy  and  theology. 

By  far  the  best  edition  of  Clemens  is  that  of  Potter,  Oxford,  1715,  2  vols.  fol.    A  very 
good  edition  also  is  that  of  Klotz,  Leipzig,  1830-34,  4  vols.  12mo. 

5.  ORIGENES  ('ftpryej/Tjs),1  usually  called  ORIGEN,  one  of  the  most  emi 
nent  of  the  early  Christian  writers,  was  born  at  Alexandrea,  A.D.  186. 
He  received  a  careful  education  from  his  father  Leonides,  who  was  a 
devout  Christian,  and  he  subsequently  became  a  pupil  of  Clejnens,  of 
Alexandrea.  After  an  active  and  checkered  life,  the  details  of  which 
belong  more  properly  to  sacred  literature,  he  died  in  A.D.  253  or  254,  his 
end  having  been  hastened  by  the  sufferings  which  he  had  undergone  in 
the  Decian  persecution  (249-251).  The  place  of  his  death  was  Tyre,  in 
which  city  he  was  buried.  He  was  in  his  sixty-ninth  year  at  the  time  of 
his  decease.  The  following  are  the  most  important  of  Origen's  works  :  1. 
The  Hexapla.,  which  consisted  of  six  copies  of  the  Old  Testament  ranged 
in  parallel  columns.  The  first  column  contained  the  Hebrew  text  in 
Hebrew  characters  ;  the  second  the  same  text  in  Greek  characters  ;  the 
third  the  version  of  Aquila ;  the  fourth  that  of  Symmachus  ;  the  fifth  the 
Septuagint ;  the  sixth  the  version  of  Theodotion.  Besides  the  compila 
tion  and  arrangement  of  these  versions,  Origen  added  marginal  notes, 
containing,  among  other  things,  an  explanation  of  the  Hebrew  names. 
Only  fragments  of  this  valuable  work  are  extant.  2.  Exegetical  Works, 
which  comprehend  three  classes.  (A)  Tomi,  which  Jerome  renders 
volumina,  containing  ample  commentaries,  in  which  he  gave  full  scope  to 
his  intellect.  (B)  Scholia,  or  brief  notes  on  detached  passages.  (C) 
Homilia,  or  popular  expositions,  chiefly  delivered  at  Caesarea.  In  his 
various  expositions  Origen  sought  to  extract  from  the  sacred  writings 
their  historical,  mystical  or  prophetical,  and  moral  significance.  His  de 
sire  of  finding  continually  a  mystical  sense  led  him  frequently  into  the 
neglect  of  the  historical  sense,  and  even  into  the  denial  of  its  truth.  This 
capital  fault  has  at  all  times  furnished  ground  for  depreciating  his  labors, 
and  has  no  doubt  materially  diminished  their  value.  It  must  not,  how 
ever,  be  supposed  that  his  denial  of  the  historical  truth  of  the  sacred 
writings  is  more  than  occasional,  or  that  it  has  been  carried  out  to  the 
full  extent  which  some  of  his  accusers  have  charged  upon  him.  3.  De 
Principiis  (Uepl  apx&i>).  This  work  was  the  great  object  of  attack  with 
Origen's  enemies,  and  the  source  from  which  they  derived  their  chief 
evidence  of  his  various  alleged  heresies.  It  was  divided  into  four  books. 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  511 

Of  this  work  some  important  fragments  are  extant,  and  the  Latin  version 
of  Rufinus  has  come  down  to  us  entire ;  but  Rufinus  took  great  liberties 
with  the  original,  and  the  unfaithfulness  of  his  version  is  denounced  in 
the  strongest  terms  by  Jerome.  4.  Exhortatio  ad  Martyrium  (Els  paprvpiov 
irporpfTTTiKbs  \6yos),  or  De  Martyrio  (Ilepl  paprvpiov),  written  during  the 
persecution  under  the  Emperor  Maximinus,  and  still  extant.  5.  Contra 
Celsum  Libri  VIIL  (Kara  Kc'Aerou  ixfyiot  TJ),  still  extant.  In  this  important 
work  Origen  defends  the  truths  of  Christianity  against  the  attacks  of 
Celsus.1 

There  is  a  valuable  work  entitled  Philocalia  (*jAo/foA.ta),  which  is  a  com 
pilation  by  Basil  of  Caesarea,  and  his  friend  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  made 
almost  exclusively  from  the  writings  of  Origen,  of  which  many  important 
fragments  have  been  thus  preserved.  Few  writers  have  exercised  greater 
influence  by  the  force  of  their  intellect  and  the  variety  of  their  attain 
ments  than  Origen,  or  have  been  the  occasion  of  longer  and  more  acri 
monious  disputes.  Of  his  more  distinctive  tenets,  several  had  reference 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  to  the  subject  of  the  Incarnation,  and  to  the 
pre-existence  of  Christ's  human  soul,  which,  as  well  as  the  pre-existence 
of  other  human  souls,  he  affirmed.  He  was  charged,  also,  with  holding 
the  corporeity  of  angels,  and  with  other  errors  as  to  angels  and  demons. 
He  held  the  freedom  of  the  human  will,  and  ascribed  to  man  a  nature  less 
corrupt  and  depraved  than  was  consistent  writh  orthodox  views  of  the 
operation  of  Divine  grace.  He  held,  moreover,  the  doctrine  of  the  uni 
versal  restoration  of  the  guilty,  conceiving  that  the  devil  alone  would 
suffer  eternal  punishment. 

The  best  edition  of  the  works  of  Origen  is  by  Delarue,  Paris,  1733-59,  4  vols.  fol.,  re 
printed  in  25  vols.  8vo,  1831-48,  under  the  editorial  care  of  Lommatsch.  The  best  sep 
arate  edition  of  the  Hexapla  is  by  Montfaucon,  Paris,  1714. 

6.  AMMONIUS,  called  SACCAS  ('A/^cW>s  ^UKKUS,  i.  e.,  2a/cKo<£o'/>os),a  or  sack- 
carrier,  because  his  employment  was  carrying  the  corn  landed  at  Alex- 
andrea,  as  a  public  porter  (saccarius),  was  born  of  Christian  parents. 
Porphyry3  asserts,  Eusebius*  and  St.  Jerome5  deny,  that  he  apostatized 
from  the  faith.  At  any  rate,  he  combined  the  study  of  philosophy  with 
Christianity,  and  is  regarded  by  those  who  maintain  his  apostasy  as  the 
founder  of  the  Neo-Platonic  school.  Among  his  disciples  are  mentioned 
Longinus,  Herennius,  and  Plotinus.  He  died  A.D.  243,  at  the  age  of 
more  than  eighty  years.  The  pagan  disciples  of  Ammonius  held  a  kind 
of  philosophical  theology.  Faith  was  derived  by  inward  perception  ;  God 
was  three-fold  in  essence,  intelligence  (viz.,  in  knowledge  of  himself),  and 
power  (viz.,  in  activity),  the  two  latter  notions  being  inferior  to  the  first. 
The  care  of  the  world  was  intrusted  to  gods  of  an  inferior  race ;  below 
those,  again,  were  demons,  good  and  bad :  an  ascetic  life  and  theurgy 
led  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Infinite,  who  was  worshipped  by  the  vulgar 
only  in  their  national  deities.  If  we  are  to  consider  him  a  Christian, 
he  was,  besides  his  philosophy  (which  would,  of  course,  then  be  repre- 

i  Smith,  1.  c.  *  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

3  Porph.,  lib.  iii.,  adv.  Christian,  ap.  Euseb.,  H.  E.,  vi.,  19. 

*  Euseb.,  I.  c.  *  Vir.  Ill.,(>  55. 


512  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

sented  by  Origcn,  and  not  by  the  pagan  Alexandrean  school,  as  just  de 
scribed),  noted  for  his  writings,  especially  on  the  Scriptures.  He  com 
posed  a  Diatcssaroti  or  Harmony  of  the  Gospels,  which  still  exists  in  the 
Latin  version  of  Victor,  bishop  of  Capua  (in  the  sixth  century,  who  wrong 
ly  ascribed  it  to  Tatian),  and  of  Luscinius.  He  also  wrote  a  treatise,  De 
Conscnsu  Moysis  ct  Jcsu,  which  is  praised  by  St.  Jerome.  A  life  of  Aris 
totle,  prefixed  to  the  Commentary  of  his  namesake  on  the  Categories, 
has  been  ascribed  to  Ammonius,  but  it  is  probably  the  work  of  John 
Philoponus.1 

7.  PLOTINUS  (nAomi/os),2  the  originator,  according  to  some,  of  the  Neo- 
Platonic  system  (though  not  of  its  fundamental  principles),  lived  so  ex 
clusively  in  speculation  that  he  appeared  to  be  ashamed  of  his  own  bodily 
organization,  and  would  tell  neither  his  parents,  his  forefathers,  his  native 
country,  nor  even  his  birth-day,  in  order  to  avoid  the  celebration  of  it. 
According,  however,  to  Suidas  and  others,  he  was  born  at  Lycopolis,  in 
Egypt,  about  A.D.  203.  The  details  of  his  life  have  been  preserved  by 
his  disciple  Porphyry,  in  a  biography  which  has  come  down  to  us.  From 
him  we  learn  that  Plotinus  began  to  study  philosophy  in  his  twenty-eighth 
year,  and  remained  eleven  years  under  the  instruction  of  Ammonius  Sac- 
cas.  In  his  thirty-ninth  year,  he  joined  the  expedition  of  the  Emperor 
Gordian,  (A.D.  242)  against  the  Persians,  in  order  to  become  acquaint 
ed  with  the  philosophy  of  the  Persians  and  Indians.  After  the  death  of 
Gordian  he  fled  to  Antioch,  and  thence  to  Rome  (A.D.  244).  For  the 
first  ten  years  of  his  residence  at  Rome,  he  gave  only  oral  instruction  to 
a  few  friends,  but  he  was  at  length  induced,  A.D.  254,  to  commit  his  in 
structions  to  writing.  In  this  manner,  when,  ten  years  later  (A.D.  264), 
Porphyry  came  to  Rome,  and  joined  himself  to  Plotinus,  twenty-one 
books  of  very  various  contents  had  been  already  composed  by  him.  Dur 
ing  the  six  years  that  Porphyry  lived  with  Plotinus  at  Rome,  the  latter, 
at  the  instigation  of  Arnelius  and  Porphyry,  wrote  twenty-three  books  on 
the  subjects  which  had  been  discussed  in  their  meetings,  to  which  nine 
books  were  afterward  added. 

Of  the  fifty-three  books  of  Plotinus,  Porphyry  remarks  that  the  first 
twenty-one  books  were  of  a  lighter  character,  that  only  the  twenty-three 
following  were  the  production  of  the  matured  powers  of  the  author,  and 
that  the  other  nine,  especially  the  last  four,  were  evidently  written  with 
diminished  vigor.  The  correction  of  these  fifty-three  books  \vas  commit 
ted  by  Plotinus  himself  to  the  care  of  Porphyry.  On  account  of  the 
weakness  of  his  sight,  Plotinus  never  read  them  through  a  second  time, 
to  say  nothing  of  making  corrections  ;  intent  simply  upon  the  matter,  he 
was  alike  careless  of  orthography,  of  the  division  of  the  syllables,  and  the 
clearness  of  the  handwriting.  The  fifty-three  books  were  divided  by 
Porphyry  into  six  Enneads,  or  sets  of  nine  books. 

Plotinus  was  eloquent  in  his  oral  communications,  and  was  said  to  be 

very  clever  in  finding  the  appropriate  word,  even  if  he  failed  in  accuracy 

on  the  whole.     Besides  this,  the  beauty  of  his  person  was  increased 

when  discoursing ;  his  countenance  was  lighted  up  with  genius,  and  cov- 

1  Smith,  I.  c.  '•>  Brandis;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr,,  s.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  513 

ered  with  small  drops  of  perspiration.  He  lived  on  the  scantiest  fare, 
and  his  hours  of  sleep  were  restricted  to  the  briefest  time  possible.  He 
was  regarded  with  admiration  and  respect  not  only  by  men  of  science, 
like  the  philosophers  Amelius,  Porphyry,  the  physicians  Paulinus,  Eu- 
stochius,  and  Zethus  the  Arab,  but  even  by  senators  and  other  states 
men.  He  enjoyed  the  favor  of  the  Emperor  Gallienus  and  the  Empress 
Salonina,  and  almost  obtained  from  them  the  rebuilding  of  two  destroyed 
towns  in  Campania,  with  the  view  of  their  being  governed  according  to 
the  laws  of  Plato.  He  died  at  Puteoli  in  A.D.  262. 

The  philosophical  system  of  Plotinus  is  founded  upon  Plato's  writings, 
with  the  addition  of  various  tenets  drawn  from  the  Oriental  philosophy 
and  religion.  He  appears,  however,  to  avoid  studiously  all  reference  to 
the  Oriental  origin  of  his  tenets  ;  he  endeavors  to  find  them  all  under  the 
veil  of  the  Greek  mythology,  and  points  out  here  the  germ  of  his  own 
philosophical  and  religious  convictions.  Plotinus  is  not  guilty  of  that 
commixture  and  falsification  of  the  Oriental  mythology  and  mysticism 
which  is  found  in  lamblichus,  Proclus,  and  others  of  the  Neo-Platonic 
school.1 

The  best  edition  of  the  Enneads  of  Plotinus  is  that  of  Creuzer,  Oxford,  1835,  3  vols. 
4to,  containing  very  able  critical  and  exegetical  annotations. 

8.  PORPHYRIUS  (Iloptyvpios),*  usually  called  PORPHYRY,  the  celebrated 
antagonist  of  Christianity,  was  born  A.D.  233,  either  in  Batanaea,  in  Pales 
tine,  or  at  Tyre.  His  original  name  was  Malchus,  the  Greek  form  of  the 
Syrophoenician  Melech,  a  word  which  signified  king.  The  name  Porphy- 
rius  (in  allusion  to  the  usual  color  of  royal  robes)  was  subsequently  de 
vised  for  him  by  his  preceptor  Longinus.  After  studying  under  Origen 
at  Caesarea,  and  under  Apollonius  and  Longinus  at  Athens,  he  settled  at 
Rome  in  his  thirtieth  year,  and  there  became  a  diligent  disciple  of  Plo 
tinus.  He  soon  gained  the  confidence  of  the  latter,  and  was  intrusted 
by  him  with  the  difficult  and  delicate  duty  of  correcting  and  arranging 
his  writings.  After  remaining  in  Rome  six  years,  Porphyry  fell  into  an 
unsettled  state  of  mind,  and  began  to  entertain  the  idea  of  suicide,  in 
order  to  get  free  from  the  shackles  of  the  flesh ;  but,  on  the  advice  of 
Plotinus,  he  took  a  voyage  to  Sicily,  where  he  resided  for  some  time.  It 
was  during  his  residence  in  Sicily  that  he  wrote  his  treatise  against  the 
Christian  religion,  in  fifteen  books.  Of  the  remainder  of  his  life  we 
know  very  little.  He  returned  to  Rome,  where  he  continued  to  teach 
until  his  death,  which  took  place  about  A.D.  305  or  306.  Late  in  life  he 
married  Marcella,  the  widow  of  one  of  his  friends,  and  the  mother  of 
seven  children,  with  the  view,  as  he  avowed,  of  superintending  their 
education. 

As  a  writer  Porphyry  deserves  considerable  praise.  His  style  is  toler 
ably  clear,  and  not  unfrequently  exhibits  both  imagination  and  vigor.  His 
learning  was  most  extensive.  A  great  degree  of  critical  and  philosophical 
acumen  was  not  to  be  expected  in  one  so  ardently  attached  to  the  en 
thusiastic  and  somewhat  fanatical  system  of  Plotinus.  His  attempt  to 
prove  the  identity  of  the  Platonic  and  Aristotelian  systems  would  alone  be 
*  Brandts,  I.  e.  «  Sjnith,  Diet..  Biogr>,  s.  v. 


514  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

sufficient  to  show  this.  Nevertheless,  his  acquaintance  with  the  authors 
whom  he  quotes  was  manifestly  far  from  superficial.  His  most  cele 
brated  work  was  his  treatise  against  the  Christian  religion ;  but  of  its 
nature  and  merits  we  are  not  able  to  judge,  as  it  has  not  come  down  to 
us.  It  was  publicly  destroyed  by  order  of  the  Emperor  Theodosius.  The 
attack  was  sufficiently  vigorous  to  call  forth  replies  from  above  thirty 
different  antagonists,  the  most  distinguished  of  whom  were  Methodius, 
Apollinaris,  and  Eusebius.  A  large  number  of  his  works,  however,  have 
come  down  to  us,  of  which  his  Life  of  Pythagoras  and  Life  of  Plotinus  are 
two  of  the  best  known.  Another  work  of  his  deserving  of  notice  is  that 
on  the  Cave  of  the  Nymphs,  described  in  the  Odyssey.  It  is  a  fanciful 
allegorical  interpretation  of  Homer's  description  of  the  cave,  showing 
both  the  ingenuity  and  the  recklessness  with  which  Porphyry  and  other 
writers  of  his  stamp  pressed  writers  and  authorities  of  all  kinds  into  their 
service,  as  holders  of  the  doctrines  of  their  school.1 

The  Life  of  Pythagoras  was  edited,  along  with  that  of  the  same  philosopher  by  lam- 
blichus,  with  the  notes  of  Holstenius,  &c.,  by  Kiessling,  Leipzig,  1815.  The  Life  of 
Plotinus  is  given  by  Creuzer,  in  his  edition  of  the  works  of  that  philosopher,  Oxford,  1835, 
3  vols.  4to.  The  work  on  the  Cave  of  the  Nymphs  is  best  edited  by  Goens,  Utrecht,  1765, 
4to,  reprinted  by  Rhoer,  in  his  edition  of  Porphyry's  work  on  Abstinence  from  Animal 
Food,  Leyden,  1792,  4to. 

9.  IAMBLICHUS  ('la/t/SAiX05)2  was  born  a*  Chalcis,  in  Ccele-Syria.     He 
resided  in  Syria  during  the  greater  part  of  his  life,  and  died  in  the  reign 
of  Constantino  the  Great,  probably  before  A.D.  333.     He  was  inferior  in 
judgment  and  learning  to  the  earlier  Neo-Platonists,  Plotinus  and  Por 
phyry,  and  he  introduced  into  his  system  many  of  the  superstitions  and 
mysteries  of  the  East,  by  which  he  endeavored  to  check  the  progress  of 
Christianity.     The  extant  works  of  lamblichus  are,  1.  Uepl  rivdaydpov 
cupeVecos,  on  the  Philosophy  of  Pythagoras.     It  was  intended  as  a  prepara 
tion  for  the  study  of  Plato,  and  consisted  originally  of  ten  books,  of  which 
five  only  are  extant.     The  first  book  contains  an  account  of  the  Life  of 
Pythagoras,  and  though  compiled  without  care,  it  is  yet  of  value,  as  the 
other  works  from  which  it  is  taken  are  lost.     The  second  book,  TlpoTpfir- 
riKol  \6yot  els  <j)i\oo-o<t>iav,  forming  a  sort  of  introduction  to  the  study  of 
Plato.    The  third  book,  Ilepl  KOIVTJS  /j.a6rifj.ariKrls  eTno-r^uTjs,  containing  many 
fragments  of  the  works  of  early  Pythagoreans.    The  fourth  book,  Ilepl  TT?S 

tB/jL-ririKTis  eiscrywyrjs.  The  fifth  book,  To  1^60X070 y/xeva  TTJS 
2.  Ilepl  nvffTijpicov,  written  to  prove  the  divine  origin  of  the 
Egyptian  and  Chaldaean  theology.  lamblichus  wrote  other  works  which 
are  lost. 

The  Life  of  Pythagoras  was  edited  by  Kuster,  Amsterdam,  1707,  and  by  Kiessling, 
Leipzig,  1815.  The  Adhortatio  ad  Philosophiam,  by  Kiessling,  Leipzig,  1813,  8vo.  The 
treatise  n-epl  KOIVTJS  ^aOrj^anK^  e7ri<mj/aTjs,  by  Fries,  Copenhagen,  1790.  The  treatise 
wept  TTJS  NiKojxaxou  apifytTjTiKTJs  ecsa-yw/Tjs,  by  Tennulius,  Deventer  and  Arnheim,  1668. 
The  Theologumena  Arithmeticce,  by  Ast,  Leipzig.  1817,  8vo.  The  De  Mysteriis,  by  Gale, 
Oxford,  1678,  fol. 

10.  PROCLUS  (Ilpd'/cXos),3  surnamed  Diadochus  (Ai65o\os),  or  the  "  Suc 
cessor,"  from  his  being  regarded  as  the  genuine  successor  of  Plato  in 
doctrine,  was  one  of  the  most  celebrated  teachers  of  the  Neo-Platonic 

1  Smith,  1.  c.  2-  Id.  ib.  3  Smith,  Diet.  Bingr.,  a.  v. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  515 

school.  .He  was  bora  at  Constantinople,  A.D.  412,1  and  belongs,  there 
fore,  in  reality  to  the  succeeding  period  of  Grecian  literature ;  but  we 
prefer  considering  him  here,  along  with  his  numerous  followers,  in  or 
der  to  complete  the  grouping  of  the  Neo-Platonic  school.  Proclus  was 
brought  up  at  Xanthus,  in  Lycia,  to  which  city  his  parents  belonged,  and 
which  city  he  himself  regarded  as  his  native  place.  He  studied  at  Alex- 
andrea  under  Olympiodorus,  and  afterward  at  Athens,  under  Plutarchus 
and  Syrianus.  At  an  early  age  his  philosophical  attainments  attracted 
the  attention  and  admiration  of  his  contemporaries.  He  had  written  his 
commentary  on  the  Timaeus  of  Plato,  as  well  as  many  other  treatises,  by 
his  twenty-eighth  year.  On  the  death  of  Syrianus,  Proclus  succeeded 
him  in  his  school,  and  inherited  from  him  the  house  in  which  he  resided 
and  taught. 

Marinus,  in  his  Life  of  Proclus,  records  with  intense  admiration  the  per 
fection  to  which  his  master  attained  in  all  virtues.  The  highest  of  these 
virtues  were,  in  the  estimation  of  Marinus,  those  of  a  purifying  and  ascetic 
kind.  From  animal  food  he  almost  totally  abstained  ;  fasts  and  vigils  he 
observed  with  scrupulous  exactitude.  The  reverence  with  which  he 
honored  the  sun  and  moon  would  seem  to  have  been  unbounded.  He 
celebrated  all  the  important  religious  festivals  of  every  nation,  himself 
composing  hymns,  in  honor  not  only  of  Grecian  deities,  but  of  those  of 
other  nations  also.  Nor  were  departed  heroes  and  philosophers  excepted 
from  this  religious  veneration ;  and  he  even  performed  sacred  rites  in 
honor  of  the  departed  spirits  of  the  entire  human  race.  It  was,  of  course, 
not  surprising  that  such  a  man  should  be  favored  with  various  appari 
tions  and  miraculous  interpositions  of  the  gods.  He  used  to  tell  how  a 
god  had  once  appeared  and  proclaimed  to  him  the  glory  of  the  city.  But 
the  still  higher  grade  of  what,  in  the  language  of  the  school,  was  termed 
the  theurgic  virtue,  he  attained  by  his  profound  meditation  on  the  oracles, 
and  the  Orphic  and  Chaldaic  mysteries,  into  the  profound  secrets  of  which 
he  was  initiated  by  Asclepigenia,  the  daughter  of  Plutarchus,  who  alone 
was  in  complete  possession  of  the  theurgic  knowledge  and  discipline.  He 
profited  so  much  by  her  instructions,  as  to  be  able,  according  to  Marinus, 
to  call  down  rain  in  a  time  of  drought,  to  stop  an  earthquake,  and  to  pro 
cure  the  immediate  intervention  of  ^Esculapius  to  cure  the  daughter  of 
his  friend  Archiadas. 

Proclus  died  A.D.  485.  During  the  last  five  years  of  his  life  he  had 
become  superannuated,  his  strength  having  been  exhausted  by  his  fast 
ings  and  other  ascetic  practices.  As  a  philosopher,  Proclus  enjoyed  the 
highest  celebrity  among  his  contemporaries  and  successors  ,  but  his  phil 
osophical  system  is  characterized  by  vagueness,  mysticism,  and  want  of 
good  sense.  He  professed  that  his  design  was  not  to  bring  forward  views 
of  his  own,  but  simply  to  expound  Plato,  in  doing  which  he  proceeded  on 
the  idea  that  every  thing  in  Plato  must  be  brought  into  accordance  with 
the  mystical  theology  of  Orpheus.  He  wrote  a  separate  work  on  the  co 
incidence  of  the  doctrines  of  Orpheus,  Pythagoras,  and  Plato.  It  was 
much  in  the  same  spirit  that  he  attempted  to  blend  together  the  logical 
1  Marini  Vita  Prodi,  c.  6. 


516  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

method  of  Aristotle  and  the  fanciful  speculations  of  IS' eo- Platonic  mysti 
cism.  Several  of  the  works  of  Proclus  are  still  extant.  The  most  im 
portant  of  them  consist  of  commentaries  on  Plato.1 

There  is  no  complete  edition  of  the  extant  works  of  Proclus.  The  edition  of  Cousin 
(Paris,  fi  vols.  8vo,  1820-27)  contains  the  treatises-  on  Providence  and  Fate,  on  the  Ten 
Doubts  about.  Providence,  and  on  the  nature  of  Evil,  the  commentary  on  the  first  Alci- 
biades,  and  that  on  the  Parmenides.  Of  editions  of  particular  portions  of  his  works,  we 
may  mention  that  of  Boissonade,  containing  parts  of  a  commentary  on  the  Cratylus  of 
Plato,  Leipzig,  1820;  and  that  of  Creuzer,  containing  the  commentary  on  the  first  Alci- 
biades,  and  the  Institutio  Theologica  (Sroixetwa-is  ©eoAo-yi/oj),  along  with  the  commentary 
of  Olympiodorus  on  the  Alcibiades,  Frankfort,  1820-22,  8vo. 

Proclus  left  behind  him  a  crowd  of  followers,  of  whom  some  were 
females,  such  as  Hypatia,  Sosipatra,  &c.  His  disciples  were  of  very  dif 
ferent  degrees  of  talent,  but  little  distinguished  for  improving  the  sort  of 
philosophy  wrhich  he  had  bequeathed  to  them.  Among  the  most  consid 
erable  were  MARINUS,  of  Flavia  Neapolis,  in  Palestine,  who  succeeded 
Proclus  as  a  teacher  at  Athens,  and  wrote  his  life  (edited  by  Boissonade, 
Leipzig,  1814),  but  who  subsequently  differed  from  him  in  his  interpreta 
tion  of  Plato;  then  ISIDORUS  of  Gaza,  who  took  the  place  of  Marinus  at 
Athens,  and  afterward  removed  to  Alexandrea,  an  enthusiastic  character, 
but  devoid  of  originality;  and  ZENODOTUS,  the  successor  of  the  latter  in 
what  they  termed  the  golden  chain ;  still  later,  HELIODORUS  and  AMMONI- 
us,  both  the  sons  of  Hermias  of  Alexandrea,  and  the  latter  of  whom  taught 
there.  The  last  who  taught  the  Neo-Platonic  system  in  the  Academy  at 
Athens  was  DAMASCIUS  of  Damascus,  born  about  A.D.  480,  and  who  united 
clearness  of  understanding  to  activity  of  imagination.  Among  his  dis 
ciples  and  those  of  Ammonius  was  the  celebrated  commentator  on  Aris 
totle,  SIMPLICIUS  of  Cilicia,  who,  as  well  as  his  teacher,  endeavored  to 
reconcile  Aristotle  and  Plato.  He  also  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  En 
chiridion  of  Epictetus.  Both  this  and  his  commentaries  on  the  Categories, 
on  the  De  Ccelo,  on  the  Physica  Auscultatio,  and  on  the  De  Anima,  are  still 
extant.  The  Emperor  Justinian  having,  by  a  severe  decree,  caused  the 
schools  of  the  heathen  philosophers  to  be  closed,  Damascius,  with  Isi- 
dorus,  Simplicius,  and  others,  were  obliged  to  flee  into  Persia,  to  the  pro 
tection  of  the  Persian  king  Chosroes.  They  returned,  indeed,  in  A.D. 
533,  by  an  express  stipulation  in  the  treaty  of  peace  between  Chosroes 
and  Justinian,  but  the  ardor  of  this  sect,  which  had  so  long  and  so  widely 
prevailed,  and  had  exerted  an  insensible  influence  even  over  the  opinions 
of  the  Christian  philosophers,  was  manifestly  on  the  decline.3 

The  only  work  of  Damascius  which  has  been  edited  is  entitled  "  Doubts  and  Solu 
tions  of  the  first  Principles,"  by  Kopp,  Frankfort,  1828,  8vo.  There  are  various  editions 
of  the  commentaries  of  Simplicius,  but  a  good  one  is  still  a  desideratum.  The  best  edi 
tion  of  the  commentary  on  the  Enchiridion  of  Epictetus  is  that  by  Schweighaeuser,  in 
his  EpictetecB  Philosophies  Monumenta,  vol.  iv.  There  is  also  a  good  edition  in  Didot's 
Scriptores  Ethici  Greed,  Paris,  1840. 

PHILOSOPHY  OF  THE  FATHERS  OF  THE  CHUBCH.3 

I.  The  disciples  whom  Christianity  was  continually  gaining  in  different 
countries  were  imbued  with  very  different  principles  and  feelings,  and 
1  Smitk,  I.  c.  •  TVrcnmonn,  p.  193,  stqq*  3  /&,  p.  195,  &qq. 


ROMAN     PERIOD,  517 

many  of  them  had  also  imbibed  some  philosophical  system  or  other.  The 
knowledge  which  such  had  already  acquired  of  the  theories  of  the  Greeks ; 
the  necessity  of  replying  to  the  attacks  of  heathen  adversaries  ;  and  the 
desire  of  illustrating,  defining,  and  substantiating  the  Christian  doctrines, 
and  forming  into  a  whole  the  Iblutions  which  were  offered,  from  time  to 
time,  of  the  questions  and  cavils  of  their  adversaries — all  these  causes 
gradually  led  to  the  formation  of  a  species  of  philosophy  peculiar  to  Chris 
tianity,  which  successively  assumed  different  aspects,  as  regarded  its 
principles  and  object.  By  these  meajis  something  of  the  Grecian  spirit  of 
philosophy  was  transfused  into  the  writings  of  the  fathers  of  the  Church, 
and,  in  after  times,  proved  the  material  germ  of  original  speculations. 

II.  The  Christian  religion  was  formed  for  universality  by  its  simplicity, 
its  close  alliance  with  morality,  and  the  spirit  of  its  worship,  at  once  mild 
and  severe.     Its  first  teachers  recognized  in  it  a  divine  doctrine.     Wis 
dom,  which  had  so  long  been  sought  for  by  human  reason,  seemed  at  last 
found.    The  limits  of  truth  and  of  duty  had  (if  mankind  would  have  been 
satisfied)  been  at  length  defined,  and  the  strange  dissensions  of  inquirers 
after  both  reconciled.     But  the  fact  of  the  divine  origin  of  the  religion 
gave  occasion  to  various  representatioRs,  and  it  was  asked  how  revela 
tion  can  be  established ;  how  it  can  be  ascertained  that  a  doctrine  is  di 
vine  ;  and  what  is  its  true  import.    Hence  the  various  degrees  of  author 
ity  allowed  by  different  parties  to  the  pretensions  of  tradition  and  phi 
losophy. 

III.  Many  of  the  fathers  of  the  Church,  especially  the  Grecian,  consid 
ered  philosophy  as  in  harmony  with  the  Christian  religion  (at  least  par 
tially  so),  inasmuch  as  both  were  derived  from  the  same  common  source. 
This  source  of  truth  in  the  heathen  philosophy  was,  according  to  Justin 
Martyr,  derived  from  internal  revelation  by  the  A6yos  and  tradition.    Ac 
cording  to  St.  Clement  and  the  other  Alexandreans,  it  was  drawn  from 
tradition  recorded  in  the  Jewish  Scriptures.     According  to  St.  Augustin, 
it  was  simply  oral.    In  the  estimation  of  all  these  fathers,  philosophy  was, 
if  not  necessary,  at  least  useful  for  the  defence  and  confirmation  of  the 
Christian  doctrine. 

IV.  Other  fathers  of  the  Church,  especially  certain  of  the  Latin,  as 
TERTULLIAN,  ARNOBIUS,  and  his  disciple  LACTANTIUS,  surnamed  the  Chris 
tian  Cicero,  deemed  philosophy  a  superfluous  study,  and  adverse  to  Chris 
tianity,  as  tending  to  alienate  man  from  God.     Nevertheless,  the  party 
which  favored  such  pursuits  gradually  acquired  strength  ;  and  the  fathers 
came  to  make  use,  on  the  eclectic  system,  of  the  philosophy  of  the  Greeks. 
Accordingly,  Julian  thought  that  he  was  taking  an  effectual  method  of 
obstructing  the  Christian  religion  when  he  interdicted  to  its  followers 
the  study  of  that  philosophy.     Yet  all  the  schools  of  the  ancients  were 
far  from  meeting  with  a  like  acceptation  on  the  part  of  the  fathers.    Those 
of  Epicurus,  the  Stoics,  and  the  Peripatetics  were  little  considered,  on 
account  of  the  doubtful  manner  in  which  they  had  expressed  themselves 
with  regard  to  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  the  existence  of  a  Supreme 
Being  and  his  providence,  or  the  opposition  which  existed  between  their 
views  and  those  of  Christianity.    The  Platonic  system,  on  the  other 


518  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

hand,  from  the  degree  of  affinity  they  affected  to  discover  in  it  to  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  revelations,  was  held  in  high  esteem. 

V.  Philosophy  was  at  first  employed  as  an  auxiliary  to  the  Christian 
religion,  to  assist  in  winning  over  the  more  cultivated  of  the  Greeks  to 
whom  it  was  addressed.     Subsequently,  ft  was  turned  to  the  refutation 
of  heresies  ;  and,  lastly,  applied  to  the  elucidation  and  distinct  statement 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Church.    Through  all  these  successive  gradations 
the  relations  of  religion  and  philosophy  continued  always  the  same ;  the 
former  being  looked  upon  as  the  sole,  source  of  knowledge,  the  most  ex 
alted  and  the  only  true  philosophy ;  the  latter  being  regarded  as  merely  a 
handmaid  to  the  former,  and  a  science  altogether  earthly.     Logic  was 
exclusively  devoted  to  polemics. 

VI.  The  prevailing  system,  therefore,  of  the  fathers  is  a  supernatural- 
ism,  more  or  less  blended  with  rationalism.     The  former,  however,  daily 
acquired  additional  predominance  in  consequence  of  the  perpetual  disputes 
with  the  heretics,  who  were  inclined  to  place  reason  side  by  side  with 
revelation  ;  and  in  consequence,  also,  of  the  resolution  of  some  Christian 
teachers  to  preserve  the  unity  and  purity  of  the  faith,  revelation  came  to 
be  regarded  not  only  as  the  source  of  all  Christian  belief,  but  as  the 
fountain  also  of  all  knowledge,  speculative  and  practical.1 


CHAPTER  XLIX. 

SIXTH  OR  ROMAN  PERIOD— continued. 


I.  THE  mathematical  sciences  did  not  make  much  progress  during  the 
period  under  review,  with  the  exception  of  astronomy.     Serenus  of  An- 
tissa,  who  lived  in  the  beginning  of  the  first  century  after  Christ,  wrote 
on  cylindric  and  conic  sections,  in  two  books.     Halley  has  joined  this  work 
to  his  edition  of  Apollonius  Pergaeus,  Oxford,  1710,  fol. 

II.  ANATOLIUS  ('Ayar^A-tos)3  of  Alexandrea,  after  having  taught  the  peri 
patetic  philosophy  in  his  native  city,  was  appointed,  in  A.D.  270,  bishop 
of  Laodicea,  in  Syria.     He  wrote  a  work  on  arithmetic,  in  ten  books,  of 
which  we  have  some  fragments  remaining  in  the  Theologumena  of  lam- 
blichus,  and  also  a  species  of  mathematical  catechism,  of  which  we  have 
also  a  fragment.     In  this  last,  Anatolius  makes  the  distance  of  the 
tropics  equal  to  the  side  of  a  pentedecagon,  that  is  to  say,  twenty-four  de 
grees,  while  Ptolemy  had  determined  the  obliquity  of  the  ecliptic  at  23° 
51'  15".     Halma  seeks  to  infer  from  this  the  diminution  of  the  obliquity 
of  the  ecliptic ;  but  Letronne  has  shown  that  Anatolius  only  wished  to 
employ  a  round  number.     Anatolius  wrote  also  a  work  on  the  chro 
nology  of  Easter,  a  large  fragment  of  which  is  preserved  by  Eusebius. 
The  work  exists  in  a  Latin  translation,  which  some  ascribe  to  Rufinus, 
under  the  title  of  Volumen  de  Paschate,  or  Canones  Paschales,  and  which 
1  Ttnwemonn,  /.  c.          *  Schtill,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  v.,  p.  230,  seqq.          3  Id.  ib.,  p.  233. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  519 

was  published  by  Bucherius,  in  his  Doctrina  Temporum,  Antwerp,  1634. 
The  fragments  of  the  mathematical  works  are  given  in  Fabricius. 

III.  THEODOSIUS  (Qeo86<rios)  of  Tripolis,  a  mathematician  and  astronomer 
of  some  distinction,  appears  to  have  flourished  later  than  the  reign  of 
Trajan.     He  wrote  several  works,  of  which  the  three  following  are  ex 
tant,  and  have  been  published :  1.  ZQaipiKd,  a  treatise^  on  the  properties 
of  the  sphere,  and  of  the  circles  described  on  its  surface.    2.  Ufpl  yp.fp<av 
Kal  vunrGiv*      3.   Ilepi  oiK-fiarecw. 

The  work  on  the  Sphere  has  been  several  times  published,  both  in  a  Latin  version  and 
in  Greek.  The  latest  edition  of  the  Greek  text  is  that  of  Hunt,  Oxford,  1707,  8vo,  found 
ed  on  the  edition  of  Pena,  the  royal  mathematician  of  France,  Beauvais,  1558,  4to.  The 
work  Tlepl  rjijiepiav  KO.I  vvuriav  was  published  from  a  MS.  in  the  Vatican,  in  Latin  only, 
with  ancient  scholia,  and  figures  by  Auria,  Rome,  1591,  4to,  the  propositions,  without 
demonstrations,  having  been  previously  edited  by  Conrad  Dasypodius,  Strasburg,  1572, 
8vo.  The  treatise  Ilepi  oi*r?crea>i/  was  published  in  a  Latin  version,  according  to  Fabri 
cius,  by  Auria,  Rome,  1587,  4to.' 

IV.  MENELAUS  (Mej/e'Aoos),3  a  Greek  mathematician,  a  native  of  Alex- 
andrea,  the  author  of  a  treatise,  in  three  books,  on  the  Sphere,  which  is 
comprised  in  the  mathematical  collection  called  /j.titpbs  do-rpoj/oVoy,  or  niKpbs 
aa-Tpovo/j.ovfj.€yos.     Menelaus  is  mentioned  by  Pappus,  Proclus,  and  Ptole- 
maRUS,  who,  in  his  Magna  Syntaxis  (p.  170),  says  that  he  made  some 
astronomical  observations  at  Rome,  in  the  first  year  of  the  Emperor 
Trajan  (A.D.  98).    He  is  probably  the  same  with  the  Menelaus  introduced 
by  Plutarch  in  his  dialogue  De  Facie  in  Orbe  Luna  (p.  930).     Besides  his 
work  on  the  Sphere,  Menelaus  wrote  a  treatise  On  the  Quantity  and  Dis 
tinction  of  mixed  Bodies.     Both  works  were  translated  into  Syriac  and 
Arabic. 

A  Latin  translation  of  the  treatise  on  the  Sphere  was  published  at  Paris  in  1644  ;  and 
it  was  also  published  by  Marinus  Mersennus,  in  his  Synopsis  Mathematica,  Paris,  1644. 
This  edition  contained  many  additions  and  interpolations.  A  more  correct  edition  was 
published  at  Oxford  by  Halley,  a  reprint  of  which,  with  a  preface  by  Costard,  appeared 
at  Oxford  in  1758,  8vo. 

V.  HYPSICLES  ('Y»J><K\f}s)  of  Alexandrea,  a  Greek  mathematician,  is  usu 
ally  said,  on  the  authority  of  Suidas,  to  have  lived  about  A.D.  160,  under 
Marcus  Aurelius.    There  are  strong  arguments,  however,  for  placing  him 
not  earlier  than  A.D.  550.     The  only  work  of  his  extant  is  entitled  Ilepl 
rrjs  TWV  fwSiW  ava<popS.s,  published  with  the  Optics  of  Heliodorus,  at  Paris, 
1567.     He  is  supposed,  however,  to  have  added  the  fourteenth  and  fif 
teenth  books  to  the  Elements  of  Euclid. 

VI.  PTOLEM^BUS,  CLAUDIUS  (IlTo\e/«uos,  KAauSios),3  a  celebrated  mathe 
matician,  astronomer,  and  geographer.    We  will  here  consider  him  under 
the  first  and  second  of  these  characters,  reserving  the  third  for  the  suc 
ceeding  head.     Of  Ptolemy  himself  we  know  absolutely  nothing  but  his 
date.     He  certainly  observed  in  A.D.  139,  at  Alexandrea,  and,  since  he 
survived  Antoninus,  he  was  alive  in  A.D.  161.     His  mathematical  and 
astronomical  writings  are  as  follows  :  1 .  Meyd\ri  2iWo|jy  TTJS  'Aa-rpovonias, 
usually  known  by  its  Arabic  name  of  Almagest.     Since  the  Tetrabiblus, 
the  work  on  astrology,  was  also  entitled  Swrafry,  the  Arabians,  to  distin- 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.         2  Id.  ib.,  s.  v.         3  De  Morgan;  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.v. 


520  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

guish  the  two,  probably  called  the  greater  work  /j.eyd\t],  and  afterward 
Htyio-T-n-  The  title  Almagest  is  a  compound  of  this  last  adjective  and  the 
Arabic  article.  The  Almagest  is  divided  into  thirteen  books.  It  treats 
of  the  relations  of  the  earth  and  heaven  ;  the  effect  of  position  upon  the 
earth  ;  the  theory  of  the  sun  and  moon,  without  which  that  of  the  fixed 
stars  can  not  be  undertaken ;  the  sphere  of  the  fixed  stars,  and  those  of 
the  five  stars  called  planets.  The  seventh  and  eighth  books  are  the  most 
interesting  to  a  modern  astronomer,  as  they  contain  a  catalogue  of  the 
stars.  This  catalogue  gives  the  longitudes  and  latitudes  of  one  thousand 
and  twenty-two  stars,  described  by  their  position  in  the  constellations. 
It  seems  that  this  catalogue  is  in  the  main  really  that  of  Hipparchus,  al 
tered  to  Ptolemy's  own  time  by  assuming  the  value  of  the  precession  of 
the  equinoxes  given  by  Hipparchus  as  the  least  which  could  be ;  some 
changes  having  also  been  made  by  Ptolemy's  own  observations.  Indeed, 
the  whole  work  of  Ptolemy  appears  to  have  been  based  upon  the  observa 
tions  of  Hipparchus,  whom  he  constantly  cites  as  his  authority. 

2.  TeTpdfiip\os  5iWa|ts,  generally  called  Tetrabiblon,  or  Quadripartitum 
dc  Apotelesmatibus  et  Judiciis  Astrorum.  With  this  goes  another  small 
work  called  Kapir6s,  or  Fructus  Librorum  Suorum,  often  called  Centiloquium, 
from  its  containing  a  hundred  aphorisms.  Both  of  these  w^orks  are  as 
trological,  and  it  has  been  doubted  by  some  whether  they  are  genuine. 
But  the  doubt  merely  arises  from  the  feeling  that  the  contents  are  un 
worthy  of  Ptolemy.  3.  Kavuv  /ScunAeW,  a  catalogue  of  Assyrian,  Persian, 
Greek,  and  Roman  sovereigns,  with  the  length  of  their  reigns,  several 
times  referred  to  by  Syncellus.  4.  *a<rejs  a.ir\avS>v  aa-repat/  /cal  awayuy^ 
eino'rjjuao'tujj',  De  Apparentiis  et  Significationibus  inerrantium,  an  annual  list 
of  sidereal  phenomena.  5,  6.  De  Analemmate,  and  Planisph&rium,  These 
works  are  obtained  from  the  Arabic.  The  Analemma  is  a  collection  of 
graphical  processes  for  facilitating  the  construction  of  sun-dials.  The 
Planisphere  is  a  description  of  the  stereographic  projection,  in  which  the 
eye  is  at  the  pole  of  the  circle  on  which  the  sphere  is  projected.  7.  Utpl 
virodeffcoay  T&V  TrAai/ayieVwi/,  DC  Planetarum  Hypothesibus.  This  is  a  brief 
statement  of  the  principal  hypotheses  employed  in  the  Almagest,  for  the 
explanation  of  the  heavenly  motions.  8.  'Kp^oviKuv  /3ij3\j'a  7',  a  treatise 
on  the  theory  of  the  musical  scale.  9.  Tie  pi  Kpiriiptov  /col  r)ye/j.oviKov,  a 
metaphysical  work  ascribed  to  Ptolemy. 

It  is  as  an  astronomical  theorist  that  Ptolemy  has  earned  the  fame 
which  outlasts  his  system.  His  much-abused  epicycles  were  no  other 
than  a  geometrical  representation  of  the  process  which  a  modern  analyst 
would  have  been  obliged  to  follow  under  the  same  circumstances.  If  a 
periodical  magnitude  is  to  be  represented,  a  series  of  sines  or  cosines  is 
chosen,  the  angles  of  which  depend  upon  the  periods  of  the  observed  in 
equalities,  and  the  coefficients  upon  their  extreme  magnitudes  :  this  is 
precisely  the  algebraical  representation  of  the  process  of  Ptolemy.  A 
question  has  arisen  as  to  whether  he  himself  believed  in  the  solid  crys 
talline  orbs  which  his  followers  placed  in  the  heavens.  Some  of  his 
phrases  would  imply  that  he  leaned  to  such  a  belief,  but  a  much  larger 
lumber  are  expressive  only  of  an  hypothesis  which  saves  appearances  (to 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  521 

translate  literally),  or  represents  phenomena.  Had  he  really  adopted  such 
a  material  mechanism,  he,  who  could  argue  that  celestial  motions  must 
be  circular,  because  circular  motions  are  the  most  perfect,  would  not 
have  been  without  some  a  priori  reason  for  the  solidity  of  his  planet-car 
riages.  If  he  had  had  a  better  physical  system,  the  state  of  mathematics 
would  not  have  permitted  the  use  of  it ;  and  Copernicus  himself  had  no 
more  satisfactory  mode  of  explaining  the  inequalities  of  the  planetary 
motions  than  these  same  epicycles ;  nor  could  a  modern  astronomer, 
with  new  phenomena  to  represent,  and  no  physical  cause  to  refer  them 
to,  do  otherwise  than  adopt  the  same  course,  in  trigonometrical  language 
instead  of  geometrical.  The  methods  of  Ptolemy  are  those  of  a  great 
mathematician  ;  and  the  explanation  of  the  equation  of  time,  of  the  evec- 
tion  of  the  moon,  and  of  the  planetary  orbits,  are,  the  two  first  absolutely, 
and  the  third,  as  compared  with  any  thing  which  preceded,  master-pieces 
of  success,  the  last  of  which  has  only  lost  its  glory  because  the  perti 
nacity  of  his  distant  followers  led  them  to  put  a  mathematical  explana 
tion  in  place  of  a  physical  one.  Delambre  sees  in  the  method  proposed 
by  Ptolemy  for  the  representation  of  what  we  now  call  the  eccentricity  of 
Mercury's  orbit,  the  circumstance  which  suggested  the  ellipse  to  Kepler.1 
The  best  edition  of  the  Almagest,  and  some  of  the  other  works  of  Ptolemy,  is  that  of 
Halma,  Paris,  1813-28,  6  vols.  4to.  The  first  two  volumes  contain  the  Almagest  in 
Greek  and  French,  with  the  various  readings.  The  third  contains  the  Kai/wv  /SaaiAeW, 
and  the  $ao-eis  TUV  a.ir\a.v!av  of  Ptolemy,  together  with  the  Eisaytoyjj  of  Geminus.  The 
fourth  contains  the  'YrrofleVeis  ical  irAai/wju.eVajv  apx<"  of  Ptolemy,  and  the  'YTrorvTrwaeis 
of  Proclus  ;  and  the  two  last,  the  commentary  of  Theon  on  the  Manual  Tables  of  Ptol 
emy,  translated  by  Halma  from  MSS.  in  the  Royal  Library  of  Paris.  In  the  thirteenth 
volume  of  the  Memoirs  of  the  Astronomical  Society  will  be  found  a  fully-revised  and  col 
lated  edition  of  Ptolemy's  Catalogue  (with  others)  of  the  stars,  by  Baily.  The  Tetrabib- 
lus  and  Centiloquium  have  been  twice  printed  in  Greek  with  a  Latin  version,  and  to 
gether,  first  by  Camerarius,  Nurnberg,  1535,  4to,  and  secondly  by  Melanchthon,  Basle, 
1553,  8vo.  The  ' Apfiovnca  were  first  published  (Greek  and  Latin)  in  the  collection  of 
Greek  musicians,  by  Gogavinus,  Venice,  1562,  4to ;  next  by  Wallis  (Greek  and  Latin), 
Oxford,  1682,  4to,  with  various  readings  and  copious  notes.  This  last  edition  was  re 
printed  (with  Porphyry's  commentary,  then  first  published)  in  the  third  volume  of  Wallis's 
works,  Oxford,  1699,  fol.  The  treatise  Hep!  /cptrrjpiov,  K.  r.  A..,  was  edited  by  Bouillaud 
(Greek  and  Latin),  Paris,  1663,  4to,  and,  with  a  new  title-page  merely,  in  1681. 

WRITERS     ON     MILITARY     TACTICS     AND     KINDRED     SUBJECTS. 

I.  ONOSANDER  ('(W<raj>Spo$),2  the  author  of  a  celebrated  work  on  mili 
tary  tactics,  entitled  ^TparrjyiKbs  \6yos,  and  which  is  still  extant.  Ono- 
sander  appears  to  have  lived  about  the  middle  of  the  first  century  after 
Christ.  His  work  is  dedicated  to  Q.  Veranius,  who  is  generally  supposed 
to  be  identical  with  the  Q.  Veranius  Nepos  who  was  consul  in  A.D.  49. 
Onosander  also  remarks  in  his  preface  that  his  work  was  written  in  time 
of  peace.  It  might  very  well  have  been  written,  therefore,  between  A.D. 
49  and  A.D.  59.  If  the  consul  of  A.D.  49  was  the  person  to  whom  the 
work  was  dedicated,  it  would  agree  very  well  with  all  the  other  data, 
that  this  Veranius  accompanied  Didius  Gallus  into  Britain,  and  died  be 
fore  the  expiration  of  a  year.  All  subsequent  Greek  and  Roman  writers 
on  the  same  subject  made  the  work  of  Onosander  their  text-book,  and  in 

1  De  Morgan,  Penny  Cyclopedia,  vol.  xxiii.,  p.  482.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  v. 


522  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

particular  the  emperors  Mauricius  and  Leon  did  little  more  than  express 
in  the  corrupt  style  of  their  age  what  they  found  in  him.  Count  Moritz, 
of  Saxony,  professed  to  have  derived  great  benefit  from  the  perusal  of  a 
translation  of  this  work.  Onosander  was  a  disciple  of  the  Platonic  school 
of  philosophy,  and,  according  to  Suidas,  wrote  also  a  commentary  on  the 
Republic  of  Plato,  which  is  lost.  In  his  style  he  imitated  Xenophon  with 
some  success. 

The  best  edition  of  Onosander  is  that  of  Schwebel,  Ntlrnberg,  1761,  fol.  It  contains 
the  French  translation  of  the  Baron  de  Zur-Lauben.  In  this  edition  the  editor  availed 
himself  of  the  manuscript  notes  by  Jos.  Scaliger  and  Is.  Vossius,  which  are  preserved  in 
the  library  at  Leyden.  There  is  also  a  later  edition  by  Coraes,  Paris,  1822,  8vo. 

II.  APOLLODORUS  ('AiroAAo'Sw/jos),  a  native  of  Damascus,  a  celebrated 
architect,  lived  under  Trajan  and  Hadrian.     The  former  emperor  em 
ployed  him  to  build  his  Forum,  Odeum,  and  Gymnasium  at  Rome,  and 
also  to  construct  the  bridge  over  the  Danube,  by  which  he  passed  into 
Dacia.     Hadrian,  on  account  of  some  indiscreet  words  uttered  by  Apol- 
lodorus,  first  banished  him,  and  afterward  put  him  to  death.     Apollodorus 
has  left  a  work  on  warlike  engines,  entitled  IloAiop/cTjTtKa,  which  is  given 
in  the  collection  of  Thevenot. 

III.  ARRIANUS  ('A.ppiav6s),  of  whom  we  have  already  made  mention  in 
our  account  of  the  historical  writers  of  this  period,  composed  also  a  work 
on  Tactics  (A.6yos  TaKTiic6s,  or  T^VT\  raKTt/dj).     What  we  now  possess  of 
it,  under  this  name,  can  have  been  only  a  section  of  the  whole  work,  as  it 
treats  of  scarcely  any  thing  else  than  the  preparatory  exercises  of  the 
cavalry ;   but  this  subject  is  discussed  with  great  judgment,  and  fully 
shows  the  practical  knowledge  of  the  author.     It  is  printed  in  Scheffer's 
collection  of  ancient  works  on  tactics,  Upsala,  1664,  but  better  in  Blan- 
card's  collection  of  the  minor  works  of  Arrian. 

IV.  ^ELIANUS  TACTICUS  (Al\icwbs  TaK-n/cd's),1  a  Greek  writer  on  tactics, 
not  to  be  confounded  with  Claudius  JElianus,  of  whom  we  have  already 
treated.     He  lived  in  Rome,  and  wrote  a  work  in  fifty-three  chapters  on 
the  Military  Tactics  of  the  Greeks  (Uepl  'S.TpaTiryiKwv  To£e«i/  'EAArjvi/cwj'), 
which  he  dedicated  to  the  Emperor  Hadrian.     He  also  gives  a  brief  ac 
count  of  the  constitution  of  a  Roman  army  at  that  time.     The  work  arose, 
he  says,  from  a  conversation  he  had  with  the  Emperor  Nerva  at  Fronti- 
nus's  house  at  Formiae.     He  promises  a  work  on  Naval  Tactics  also  ;  but 
this,  if  it  was  ever  written,  is  lost. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Tactics  (a  very  bad  one)  was  published  in  1532  ;  the  next,  a 
much  better  one,  was  by  Robortellus,  Venice,  1552,  4to.  It  contains  a  new  Latin  version 
by  the  editor,  and  is  illustrated  with  many  cuts.  The  best  edition  is  that  printed  by  El 
zevir  at  Leyden, 1613,  8vo. 

V.  POLY^ENUS  (rio\iWos),a  the  Macedonian,  was  the  author  of  a  work 
on  Stratagems  in  War  (SrpaTijy^/Jiara),  which  is  still  extant.     He  lived 
about  the  middle  of  the  second  century  of  the  Christian  era.     Suidas 
calls  him  a  rhetorician,  and  we  learn  from  Polyaenus  himself  that  he  was 
accustomed  to  plead  causes  before  the  emperor.3     He  dedicated  his  work 
to  M.  Aurelius  and  Verus  while  they  were  engaged  in  the  Parthian  war, 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Id.  ib.,  s.  v.  3  Prasf.,  lib.  ii. ;  lib.  riii. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  523 

about  A.D.  163,  at  which  time  he  says  that  he  was  too  old  to  accompany 
them  in  their  campaigns.1  The  work  is  divided  into  eight  books,  of 
which  the  first  six  contain  an  account  of  the  stratagems  of  the  most  cel 
ebrated  Greek  generals,  the  seventh  those  of  barbarous  or  foreign  people, 
and  the  eighth  of  the  Romans,  and  of  illustrious  women.  Parts,  howev 
er,  of  the  sixth  and  seventh  books  are  lost,  so  that  of  the  nine  hundred 
stratagems  which  Polyaenus  described,  only  eight  hundred  and  thirty- 
three  have  come  down  to  us.  The  work  is  written  in  a  clear  and  pleas 
ing  style,  though  somewhat  tinged  with  the  artificial  rhetoric  of  the  age. 
It  contains  a  vast  number  of  anecdotes  respecting  many  of  the  most  cel 
ebrated  men  in  antiquity,  and  has  preserved  many  historical  facts  of 
which  we  should  otherwise  have  been  ignorant ;  but  its  value  as  an  his 
torical  authority  is  very  much  diminished  by  the  little  judgment  which 
the  author  evidently  possessed,  and  by  our  ignorance  of  the  sources  from 
which  he  took  his  statements.  Polyaenus  also  wrote  several  other  works, 
all  of  which  have  perished. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Greek  text  was  published  by  Casaubon,  Lyon,  1589, 12mo  ;  the 
next  by  Maasvicius,  Leyden,  1690,  8vo ;  the  third  by  Mursinna,  Berlin,  1756,  12mo  ;  and 
the  last  by  Coraes,  Paris,  1809,  8vo. 

WRITERS     ON     MUSIC. 

I.  ALYPIUS  ('AAuTnos),8  the  author  of  a  Greek  musical  treatise  entitled 
Elsayotyrj  MOWIKT).     His  date  is  uncertain,  but  he  probably  flourished  un 
der  Julian  and  his  immediate  successors.     His  work  consists  wholly, 
with  the  exception  of  a  short  introduction,  of  lists  of  the  symbols  used 
(both  for  voice  and  instrument)  to  denote  all  the  sounds  in  the  forty-five 
scales  produced  by  taking  each  of  the  fifteen  modes  in  the  three  genera 
(Diatonic,  Chromatic,  Enharmonic).     It  treats,  therefore,  in  fact,  of  only 
one  (the  fifth,  namely)  of  the  seven  branches  into  which  the  subject  is,  as 
usual,  divided  in  the  introduction,  and  may  possibly  be  merely  a  fragment 
of  a  larger  work.     It  would  have  been  most  valuable  if  any  considerable 
number  of  examples  had  been  left  us  of  the  actual  use  of  the  system  of 
notation  described  in  it ;  unfortunately,  very  few  remain,  and  they  seem 
to  belong  to  an  earlier  stage  of  the  science.     However,  the  work  serves 
to  throw  some  light  on  the  obscure  history  of  the  modes. 

The  work  forms  part  of  the  collection  of  Meibomius,  "Antiques  Musicae  Auctores  Sep- 
tem,"  Amsterdam,  1652.  The  text,  which  seemed  hopelessly  corrupt  to  Meursius,  its 
first  editor  ("Aristoxenus,  Nicornachus,  Alypius,  ed.  Joh.  Meursius,"  Leyden,  1616),  was 
restored,  apparently  with  success,  by  the  labors  of  Meibomius. 

II.  GAUDENTIUS  (rauSeVrios),3  the  author  of  an  elementary  treatise  on 
music,  but  concerning  whom  no  definite  information  whatever  has  come 
down  to  us.     In  his  theory  he  follows  the  doctrines  of  Aristoxenus, 
whence  it  has  been  inferred  that  he  lived  before  the  time  of  Ptolemy, 
whose  views  seem  to  have  been  unknown  to  him.     His  treatise  bears 
the  title  of  ElsayctyT]  a.pfj.oviK-{].     It  treats  of  the  elements  of  music,  of  the 
voice,  of  sounds,  intervals,  systems,  &c.,  and  forms  an  introduction  to 
the  study  of  music,  which  seems  to  have  enjoyed  some  reputation  in  an- 

1  Prof.,  lib.  i.  2  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  3  Id.  ib.,  s.  v. 


524  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

tiquity.  Cassiodorus  mentions  it  with  praise,  and  tells  us  that  or.e  of  K  «« 
contemporaries,  Mucianus,  had  made  a  Latin  translation  of  it  for  the  use 
of  schools.  This  translation  is,  however,  lost. 

The  work  of  Gaudentius  is  printed,  with  a  Latin  version  and  notes,  in  the  collection 
of  Meibomius,  already  mentioned. 

III.  CLAUDIUS  PTOLEM^EUS,  of  whom  we  have  already  spoken,  ought 
also  to  be  placed  among  the  ancient  writers  on  music,  as  is  shown  by  his 
treatise  on  the  theory  of  the  musical  scale,  entitled  'Apuoviitd,  in  three 
books.     He  has  the  merit  of  having  reduced  to  seven  the  fifteen  modes 
of  the  ancients.     He  is  believed,  also,  to  have  fixed  the  true  relations  of 
certain  intervals,  and  to  have  thus  rendered  the  diatonic  octave  more 
conformable  to  harmony. 

IV.  BACCHIUS  (BaKxe*°s)>  tae  author  of  a  short  musical  treatise  in  the 
form  of  a  catechism,  called  Elsayuy^i  re'xvTjs  jwouo-t/cTjs.    We  know  nothing 
of  his  history.     The  work  consists  of  brief  and  clear  explanations  of  tho 
principal  subjects  belonging  to  Harmonics  and  Rhythm.  Bacchius  reckons 
seven  modes,  corresponding  to  the  seven  species  of  octave  anciently 
called  by  the  same  names.     Hence  Meibomius  conjectures  that  he  lived 
after  Ptolemy. 

The  Greek  text  of  Bacchius  was  first  edited  by  Marinus  Mersennus,  in  his  comment 
ary  on  the  first  six  chapters  of  Genesis,  Paris,  1623,  fol.,  p.  1887.  It  also  forms  part 
with  a  Latin  version  and  notes,  of  the  collection  of  Meibomius. 

V.  ARISTIDES  QuiNTiLiANus'('ApKrrei8r?s  KoiVnAtaWs),1  the  author  of  a 
treatise,  in  three  books,  On  Music  (lie/?}  Movo-ncys).     Nothing  is  known  of 
his  history,  nor  is  he  mentioned  by  any  ancient  writer.     But  he  must 
have  lived  after  Cicero,  whom  he  quotes  (p.  70),  and  before  Martianus 
Capella,  wrho  has  made  use  of  his  treatise  in  his  work  De  Nuptiis  Philo- 
logice  et  Mercurii  (lib.  9).     It  seems  probable,  also,  that  he  must  be  placed 
before  Ptolemy,  since  he  does  not  mention  the  difference  between  that 
writer  and  his  predecessors  with  respect  to  the  number  of  modes.     The 
work  of  Aristides  is  perhaps  the  most  valuable  of  all  the  ancient  musical 
treatises.     It  embraces,  besides  the  theory  of  music  (appoviicf]')  in  the 
modern  sense,  the  whole  range  of  subjects  comprehended  under  ,uoi/cn/o?, 
which  latter  science  contemplated  not  merely  the  regulation  of  sounds, 
but  the  harmonious  disposition  of  every  thing  in  nature.     The  first  book 
treats  of  Harmonics  and  Rhythm;  the  former  subject  being  considered 
under  the  usual  heads  of  Sounds,  Intervals,  Systems,  Genera,  Modes, 
Transition,  and  Composition  (MeAoTroaa).     The  second,  of  the  moral  ef 
fects  and  educational  powers  of  music  ;  and  the  third,  of  the  numerical 
ratios  which  define  musical  intervals,  and  of  their  connection  with  phys 
ical  and  moral  science  generally.     Aristides  refers  to  another  work  of 
his  own,  Tlfpl  noirjTiitris,  which  is  lost.     He  makes  no  direct  allusion  to 
any  of  the  ancient  writers  on  music  except  Aristoxenus. 

The  only  edition  of  Aristides  is  that  of  Meibomius.  It  is  printed  along  with  the  latter 
part  of  the  ninth  book  of  Martianus  Capella,  in  Meihomius's  collection  of  the  ancient 
writers  on  music  already  referred  to. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  i>. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  525 


CHAPTER  L. 

SIXTH  OR  ROMAN  PERIOD— continued. 
GEOGRAPHICAL    WRITERS. 

I.  STRABO  (SrpcijS&jj'),1  the  celebrated  geographer,  was  a  native  of  Ama- 
sia,  in  Pontus.  The  date  of  his  birth  is  unknown,  but  may  perhaps  be 
placed  about  54  B.C.  He  lived  during  the  whole  of  the  reign  of  Augustus, 
and  during  the  early  part,  at  least,  of  the  reign  of  Tiberius.  He  is  sup 
posed  to  have  died  about  A.D.  24.  Strabo  received  a  careful  education. 
He  studied  grammar  under  Aristodemus,  at  Nysa,  in  Caria,  and  philoso 
phy  under  Xenarchus,  of  Seleucia,  in  Cilicia,  and  Boethus  of  Sidon.  He 
lived  some  years  at  Rome,  and  also  travelled  much  in  various  countries. 
We  learn  from  his  own  work  that  he  was  with  his  friend  ^Elius  Gallus 
in  Egypt  in  B.C.  24.  He  wrote  an  historical  work  entitled  'ItrropiKa 
'Tiro;u>/T?,uaTa,  in  forty-three  books,  which  is  lost.  It  began  where  the 
history  of  Polybius  ended,  and  was  probably  continued  to  the  battle  of 
Actium. 

But  his  great  work  was  his  Geography  (TecirypaQiKa),  in  seventeen  books, 
which  has  come  down  to  us  entire,  with  the  exception  of  the  seventh, 
of  which  we  have  only  a  meagre  epitome.  Strabo's  work,  according  to 
his  own  expression,  was  not  intended  for  the  use  of  all  persons  ;  and,  in 
deed,  no  complete  geographical  work  can  be  adapted  to  those  who  have 
not  the  necessary  elementary  knowledge.  His  work  was  intended  for  all 
who  had  a  good  education,  and  particularly  for  those  who  were  engaged 
in  the  higher  departments  of  administration.  It  was  designed  to  be  a 
work  which  would  give  such  persons  that  geographical  and  historical  in 
formation  about  each  country  which  a  person  engaged  in  matters  politic 
al  can  not  do  without.  Consistently  with  this  view,  his  plan  does  not 
comprehend  minute  description,  except  when  the  place  or  the  object  is 
of  great  interest  or  importance ;  nor  is  his  description  limited  to  the 
physical  characteristics  of  each  country ;  it  comprehends  the  important 
political  events  of  which  each  country  has  been  the  theatre,  a  notice  of 
the  chief  cities  and  the  great  men  who  have  rendered  them  illustrious  ; 
in  short,  whatever  was  most  characteristic  and  interesting  in  every 
country.  His  work  forms  a  striking  contrast  with  the  geography  of  Ptol 
emy,  and  the  dry  list  of  names,  occasionally  relieved  by  something  added 
to  them,  in  the  geographical  portion  of  the  Natural  History  of  Pliny.  It 
is,  in  short,  a  book  intended  for  reading,  and  it  may  be  read ;  a  kind  of 
historical  geography.8 

Strabo's  work  has  a  particular  value  to  us  of  the  present  day,  owing 
to  his  method  of  handling  the  subject.  He  has  preserved  a  great  num 
ber  of  historical  facts,  for  which  we  have  no  other  evidence  than  his 
work.  His  language  is  generally  clear,  except  in  those  passages  where 

1  Long;  Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Long,  I.  c. 


526  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

the  text  has  been  corrupted ;  it  is  appropriate  to  the  matter,  simple,  and 
without  affectation. 

It  is  objected  to  Strabo  that  he  has  undervalued  Herodotus,  and  puts 
him  on  the  same  footing  as  Ctesias.  The  work  of  Herodotus  was,  per 
haps,  hardly  appreciated,  as  it  deserved  to  be,  by  any  writer  of  antiquity ; 
and  it  is  a  well-grounded  complaint  against  Strabo,  that  he  could  not  or 
did  not  choose  to  discriminate  between  the  stories  which  Herodotus  tells 
simply  as  stories  which  he  heard,  and  that  which  is  the  result  of  the  per 
sonal  observation  of  the  historian.  There  are  many  parts  of  the  geography 
of  Strabo,  particularly  his  description  of  Greece,  for  which  he  could  have 
derived  excellent  materials  from  Herodotus.  Strabo's  authorities  are  al 
most  exclusively  Greek.  He  had  a  contempt  for  the  Roman  writers  gen 
erally  ;  and  certainly,  simply  as  geographers,  there  was  not  one  among 
them  who  could  bewailed  by  that  name.  But  the  campaigns  of  the  Ro 
mans,  and  their  historical  writings  and  memoirs,  would  have  furnished 
him  with  many  valuable  geographical  facts,  both  for  his  Asiatic  and  Eu 
ropean  geography.  He  made  some  use  of  Caesar's  writings  for  his  descrip 
tion  of  Gallia,  the  Alps,  and  Britain,  and  he  used  other  materials  also,  as  we 
see  from  his  brief  notice  of  the  voyage  of  Publius  Crassus  to  the  Cassiter- 
ides.  But,  with  this  exception,  and  the  writings  of  Asinius  Pollio,  Fabius 
Pictor,  and  an  anonymous  chorographer,  he  drew  little  from  Roman 
sources.  The  use  that  Strabo  made  of  Homer  is  another  objection  to  his 
work,  and  his  description  sometimes  becomes  rather  a  commentary  on 
Homer  than  an  independent  description,  based  on  the  actual  state  of 
knowledge.  That  which  Homer  darkly  knew,  or  half  guessed,  has  no 
value,  except  as  an  index  of  the  state  of  geographical  knowledge  at  that 
time,  and  was  entirely  useless  in  the  age  of  Strabo.1 

It  is  another  defect  in  Strabo's  work  that  the  science  of  astronomy 
was  not  properly  applied  by  him.  Though  Strabo  had  some  mathematical 
and  astronomical  knowledge,  he  undervalued  these  sciences  as  helps  to 
geography,  and  he  did  not  consider  the  exact  division  of  the  earth  into 
climates,  in  the  sense  in  which  Hipparchus  used  the  term,  and  the  state 
ment  of  the  latitudes  and  longitudes  of  places,  which  in  many  cases  were 
pretty  well  determined,  as  essential  to  his  geographical  description. 

The  first  two  books  of  Strabo  are  an  introduction  to  his  geography,  and 
contain  his  views  on  the  form  and  magnitude  of  the  earth,  and  other  sub 
jects  connected  with  mathematical  geography.  In  the  third  book  he  be 
gins  his  description.  He  devotes  eight  books  to  Europe,  six  to  Asia,  and 
the  seventeenth  and  last  to  Egypt  and  Libya. 

The  first  edition  of  Strabo  was  by  Aldus,  Venice,  1516.  The  next  edition  of  the  text 
was  by  Casaubon,  who  used  several  MSS.,  but  it  is  uncertain  if  they  exist.  There  are 
two  editions  of  the  text  by  Casaubon,  Geneva,  1587,  and  Paris,  1620,  fol.,  accompanied 
by  a  Latin  translation  and  a  commentary.  The  edition  of  1620  does  not  differ  materially 
from  that  of  1587,  and  it  is  that  which  is  generally  referred  to  by  the  page.  The  reprint 
of  Casaubon's  edition  by  Almeloveen,  Amsterdam,  1707,  is  useful  for  the  collection  of 
the  notes  of  various  critics.  The  edition  of  Falconer,  Oxford,  1807,  2  vols.  fol.,  is  a  re 
print  from  Almeloveen,  and  contains  no  improvement  of  the  text,  though  there  were 
means  for  doing  this  in  the  collation  of  five  MSS.  by  Villebrune,  and  in  other  resources. 

»  Lonf,  I.  C. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  527 

The  notice  of  this  edition  in  the  Edinburgh  Review  (vol.  xiv.,  p.  429,  seqq.)  gave  rise  to 
an  acrimonious  literary  warfare  between  that  periodical  and  some  Oxford  scholars.  In 
1796  was  commenced  the  edition  of  Siebenkees,  at  Leipzig,  in  8vo.  He  only  lived,  how 
ever,  to  complete  the  first  six  books,  in  2  vols.  The  work  was  then  taken  up  by  Tzschucke. 
Siebenkees  did  his  part  very  ill,  but  the  edition  improved  greatly  after  Tzschucke  com 
menced  his  labors.  Friedemann  continued  the  work  after  the  latter,  but  it  reached  only 
the  seventh  volume,  which  contains  the  commentary  of  Casaubon  on  the  first  three 
books.  This  volume  was  Friedemann's  addition,  and  appeared  in  1818.  Coraes  pub 
lished  an  edition  of  Strabo  at  Paris,  1815-18,  in  4  vols.  8vo.  This  was  really  the  first 
critical  edition  of  Strabo  that  was  worthy  of  the  name,  though  he  is  perhaps  justly 
blamed  for  being  sometimes  too  bold  in  substituting  the  conjectures  of  others  or  his  own 
for  MSS.  readings  which  ought  not  to  be  rejected.  By  far  the  most  valuable  edition, 
however,  is  that  of  Kramer,  Berlin,  1844-52,  3  vols.  8vo.  The  text  of  this  edition  is 
founded  on  a  new  collation  of  MSS.,  and  is  furnished  with  a  critical  commentary.  There 
is  also  a  school  edition  of  the  same,  in  2  vols.  8vo. 

A  French  translation  of  Strabo  appeared  at  Paris,  1805-19,  in  five  quarto  volumes,  and 
accompanied  by  copious  critical  and  other  notes.  It  was  translated  by  La  Porte  du 
Theil  and  Coraes,  with  the  exception  of  Du  Theil's  share,  which  was  left  unfinished  on 
his  death  in  1815,  and  which  was  completed  by  Letronne,  who  translated  the  sixteenth 
and  seventeenth  books.  Gosselin  added  the  geographical  explanations,  and  five  maps  to 
illustrate  the  systems  of  Eratosthenes,  Hipparchus,  Polybius,  and  Strabo,  with  respect 
to  the  inhabited  portion  of  the  earth.  The  best  translation  of  Strabo,  however,  is  the 
German  one  of  Groskurd,  3  vols.  8vo,  Berlin  and  Stettin,  1831-33.  The  fourth  volume, 
Berlin,  1834,  contains  a  very  complete  index,  which  is  adapted  to  the  second  edition  of 
Casaubon,  and  all  subsequent  editions,  except  the  small  Tauchnitz  one,  the  only  one 
that  has  not  the  paging  of  Casaubon's  edition  in  the  margin. 


II.  ISIDORUS  ('IffiScDpos)  of  Charax,  a  geographical  writer,  lived  probably 
under  the  early  Roman  emperors.    His  rfjs  Uapeias  irepi-nynriK^s  is  quoted 
by  Athenaeus,  and  his  5To0/uol  Uap9iKol  (probably  a  part  of  it)  are  printed 
among  the  works  of  the  minor  Greek  geographers  in  the  collections  of 
Hoschel  (1600),  Hudson  (1703),  and  Miller,  Paris,  1839. 

III.  PAUSANIAS  (riauo-cwias),1  the  traveller  and  geographer,  was  perhaps 
a  native  of  Lydia.     He  lived  under  Antoninus  Pius  and  M.  Aurelius,  and 
wrote  his  celebrated  work  in  the  reign  of  the  latter  emperor.    This  work, 
entitled  'EXXoSos  nep^-yrjoris,  A  Periegesis  or  Itinerary  of  Greece,  is  in  ten 
books,  and  contains  a  description  of  Attica  and  Megaris  (i.),  Corinthia, 
Sicyonia,  Phliasia,  and  Argolis  (ii.),  Laconica  (iii.),  Messenia  (iv.),  Elis 
(v.,  vi.),  Achaea  (vii.),  Arcadia  (viii.),  Bceotia  (ix.),  Phocis  (x.).    The  work 
shows  that  Pausanias  visited  most  of  the  places  in  these  divisions  of 
Greece,  a  fact  which  is  clearly  demonstrated  by  the  minuteness  and  par 
ticularity  of  his  description.    The  work  is  merely  an  Itinerary.    Pausanias 
gives  no  general  description  of  a  country  or  even  of  a  place,  but  he  de 
scribes  the  things  as  he  comes  to  them.     His  account  is  minute  ;  but  it 
mainly  refers  to  objects  of  antiquity  and  works  of  art,  such  as  buildings, 
temples,  statues,  and  pictures.     He  also  mentions  mountains,  rivers,  and 
fountains,  and  the  mythological  stories  connected  with  them,  which,  in 
deed,  are  his  chief  inducements  to  speak  of  them.     His  religious  feeling 
was  strong,  and  his  belief  sure,  for  he  tells  many  old  legends  in  true  good 
faith  and  seriousness.     His  style  has  been  much  condemned  by  modern 
critics  ;  but  if  we  except  some  corrupt  passages,  and  if  we  allow  that  his 
order  of  words  is  not  that  of  the  best  Greek  writers,  there  is  hardly  much 

»  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


528  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

obscurity  to  a  person  who  is  competently  acquainted  with  Greek,  except 
that  obscurity  which  is  sometimes  owing  to  the  matter.  With  the  ex 
ception  of  Herodotus,  there  is  no  writer  of  antiquity,  and  perhaps  none 
of  modern  times,  who  has  comprehended  so  many  valuable  facts  in  so 
small  a  compass. 

The  best  editions  are  by  Siebelis,  Leipzig,  1822-28,  5  vols.  8vo. :  by  Bekker,  Berlin, 
1826-7,  2  vols.  8vo ;  by  Schubart  and  Walz,  Leipzig,  1838-40,  3  vols.  8vo ;  and  by  L. 
Dindorf,  Paris,  1845,  8vo,  forming  part  of  Didot's  BMiotheca  Gr&ca. 

IV.  MAIUNUS  (Mapo/os)1  of  Tyre,  a  Greek  geographer,  lived  in  the  mid 
dle  of  the  second  century  of  the  Christian  era,  and  was  the  immediate 
predecessor  of  Ptolemy,  who  frequently  refers  to 'him.     Marinus  was  un 
doubtedly  the  founder  of  mathematical  geography  in  antiquity ;  and  we 
learn  from  Ptolemy's  own  statement  (i.,  6)  that  he  based  his  whole  work 
upon  that  of  Marinus.     The  chief  merit  of  Marinus  was  that  he  put  an 
end  to  the  uncertainty  that  had  hitherto  prevailed  respecting  the  positions 
of  places  by  assigning  to  each  its  latitude  and  longitude.     He  also  con 
structed  maps  for  his  works  on  much  improved  principles.     In  order  to 
obtain  as  much  accuracy  as  possible,  Marinus  was  indefatigable  in  study 
ing  the  works  of  his  predecessors,  the  diaries  kept  by  travellers,  and  ev 
ery  available  source.     He  made  many  alterations  in  the  second  edition 
of  his  work,  and  wrould  have  still  farther  improved  it  if  he  had  not  been 
carried  off  by  an  untimely  death. 

V.  PTOLEM^Eirs.2     We  have  already  spoken  of  the  mathematical  and 
astronomical  works  of  this  writer.     It  now  remains  to  make  mention  of 
him  as  a  geographer.     Ptolemy's  great  geographical  work,  entitled  Tew- 
jpa<piK7]  "f^yntris,  is  in  eight  books,  and  has  reached  us  entire.     This 
work  was  the  last  attempt  made  by  the  ancients  to  form  a  complete  geo 
graphical  system ;  it  was  accepted  as  the  text-book  of  the  science,  and  it 
maintained  that  position  during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  until  the  fifteenth 
century,  when  the  rapid  progress  of  maritime  discovery  caused  it  to  be 
superseded.     It  contains,  however,  very  little  information  respecting  the 
objects  of  interest  connected  with  the  different  countries  and  places ;  for, 
with  the  exception  of  the  introductory  matter  in  the  first  book,  and  the 
latter  part  of  the  work,  it  is  a  mere  catalogue  of  the  names  of  places, 
with  their  longitudes  and  latitudes,  and  with  a  fewr  incidental  references 
to  objects  of  interest.    The  latitudes  of  Ptolemy  are  tolerably  correct,  but 
his  longitudes  are  very  wide  of  the  truth,  his  length  of  the  known  world, 
from  east  to  west,  being  much  too  great.     It  is  well  worthy,  however,  of 
remark,  in  passing,  that  the  modern  world  owes  much  to  this  error ;  for 
it  tended  to  encourage  the  belief  in  the  practicability  of  a  western  pas 
sage  to  the  Indies,  which  occasioned  the  discovery  of  America  by  Co 
lumbus. 

The  first  book  of  Ptolemy's  work  is  introductory.  The  next  six  and  a 
half  books  (ii.-vii.,  4)  are  occupied  with  the  description  of  the  known 
world,  beginning  with  the  West  of  Europe,  the  description  of  which  is 
contained  in  book  second.  Next  comes  the  East  of  Europe,  in  book  third ; 
then  Africa,  in  book  fourth  ;  then  Western  or  Lesser  Asia,  in  book  fifth ; 
i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Id.  ib. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  529 

then  the  Greater  Asia,  in  book  sixth ;  then  India,  the  Chersonesus  Aurea, 
Serica,  the  Sinae,  and  Taprobane,  in  book  seventh,  chapters  one  to  four 
inclusive.  The  form  in  which  the  description  is  given  is  that  of  lists  of 
places,  with  their  longitudes  and  latitudes,  arranged  under  the  heads,  first, 
of  the  three  continents,  and  then  of  the  several  countries  and  tribes. 
Prefixed  to  each  section  is  a  brief  general  description  of  the  boundaries 
and  divisions  of  the  part  about  to  be  described  ;  and  remarks  of  a  miscel 
laneous  character  are  interspersed  among  the  lists,  to  which,  however, 
they  bear  but  a  small  proportion.  The  remaining  part  of  the  seventh 
and  the  whole  of  the  eighth  book  are  occupied  with  a  description  of  a  set 
of  maps  of  the  known  world.  These  maps  are  still  extant.1 

The  editio  princeps  of  the  Greek  text  is  that  by  Erasmus,  Basle,  1533,  4to ;  reprinted 
at  Paris,  1546,  4to.  The  text  of  Erasmus  was  reprinted,  but  with  a  new  Latin  version, 
notes,  and  indices,  edited  by  Montanus,  and  with  the  maps  restored  by  Mercator,  Am 
sterdam,  1605,  fol  ;  and  a  still  more  valuable  edition  was  brought  out  by  Bertius,  print 
ed  by  Elzevir,  with  the  maps  colored,  and  with  the  addition  of  the  Peutingerian  Tables, 
and  other  important  illustrative  matter,  Leyden,  1619,  fol.,  reprinted  Antwerp,  1624,  fol. 
The  work  also  forms  a  part  of  the  edition  of  Ptolemy's  works,  by  the  Abbe  Halma,  but 
left  unfinished  at  his  death,  Paris,  1813-28,  4to :  this  edition  contains  a  French  transla 
tion  of  the  work.  A  valuable  critical  edition,  by  Wilberg  and  Grashof,  Essen,  1838,  seqq., 
is  now  in  course  of  publication,  to  be  completed  in  eight  parts,  of  which  six  have  appear 
ed.  A  useful  little  edition  of  the  Greek  text  is  contained  in  three  volumes  of  the  Tau.ch- 
nitz  Classics,  Leipzig,  1843,  32mo. 


CHAPTER  LI. 

SIXTH  OR  ROMAN  PERIOD— continued. 
MEDICAL     WRITERS. 

I.  TOWARD  the  close  of  the  preceding  period,  the  Empiric  school  had 
attained  its  highest  celebrity  by  the  labors  of  Serapion  of  Alexandrea.  It 
had  also  been  carried  to  Rome  in  the  person  of  Archagathus,  who  was 
the  first  person  that  made  medicine  a  distinct  profession  in  that  city. 
The  individual,  however,  who  practiced  in  this  capital  with  the  most 
brilliant  success,  was  ASCLEPIADES,  of  Bithynia,2  who  came  to  Rome  at 
the  beginning  of  the  first  century  B.C.,  and  lived  there  to  a  very  great 
age.  It  is  said  that  when  he  first  came  to  Rome  he  was  a  teacher  of 
rhetoric,  and  that  it  was  in  consequence  of  his  not  being  successful  in 
this  profession  that  he  turned  his  attention  to  the  study  of  medicine. 
From  what  we  learn  of  his  history  and  of  his  practice,  it  would  appear 
that  he  may  be  fairly  characterized  as  a  man  of  natural  talents,  acquaint 
ed  with  human  nature  (or,  rather,  human  weakness),  possessed  of  con 
siderable  shrewdness  and  address,  but  with  little  science  or  professional 
skill.  He  had  the  discretion  to  refrain  from  the  use  of  very  active  and 
powerful  remedies,  and  to  trust  principally  to  the  efficacy  of  diet,  exer 
cise,  bathing,  and  other  circumstances  of  this  nature.  A  part  of  the  great 
popularity  he  enjoyed  depended  upon  his  prescribing  the  liberal  use  of 
wine  to  his  patients,  and  upon  his  not  only  attending,  in  all  cases,  with 

1  Smith,  1.  c.  »  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  v. 

z 


530  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

great  assiduity  to  every  thing  which  contributed  to  their  comfort,  but  also 
upon  his  flattering  their  prejudices  and  indulging  their  inclinations.  In 
justice  to  him,  however,  it  must  be  confessed,  that  he  seems  also  to  have 
possessed  a  considerable  share  of  acuteness  and  discernment,  which,  on 
some  occasions,  he  employed  with  advantage.  It  is  probable  that  to  him 
we  are  indebted,  in  the  first  instance,  for  the  arrangement  of  diseases  into 
the  two  great  classes  of  acute  and  chronic.  Nothing  remains  of  his  writ 
ings  but  a  few  fragments,  which  have  been  collected  by  Gumpert,  Ascle- 
piadis  Bithyni  Fragmenta,  Weimar,  1794. 

II.  DIOSCORIDES  (Atocr/copi'STjs),1  Pedacius  or  Pedanius  (UeSaxios  or  rieSd- 
i/tos),  the  author  of  a  celebrated  treatise  on  Materia  Medica  that  bears 
his  name.  It  is  generally  supposed  that  he  was  a  native  of  Anazarba, 
in  Cilicia  Campestris,  and  that  he  was  a  physician  by  profession.  It  ap 
pears  pretty  evident  that  he  lived  in  the  first  century  of  the  Christian 
era,  and,  as  he  is  not  mentioned  by  Pliny,  it  has  been  supposed  that  he 
was  a  little  posterior  to  him.  He  has  left  behind  him  a  treatise  on  Ma 
teria  Medica  (Ilepl  "TATJS  'ICIT/N/CTJS),  in  five  books,  a  work  of  great  labor 
and  research,  and  which,  for  many  ages,  was  received  as  a  standard  pro 
duction.  The  greater  correctness  of  modern  science,  and  the  new  dis 
coveries  which  have  been  made,  cause  it  now  to  be  regarded  rather  as  a 
work  of  curiosity  than  of  absolute  utility  ;  but  in  drawing  up  a  history  of 
the  state  and  progress  of  medicine,  it  affords  a  most  valuable  document 
for  our  information.  His  treatise  consists  of  a  description  of  all  the  ar 
ticles  then  used  in  medicine,  with  an  account  of  their  supposed  virtue?. 
The  descriptions  are  brief,  and  not  unfrequently  so  little  characterized  as 
not  to  enable  us  to  ascertain  with  any  degree  of  accuracy  to  what  they 
refer ;  while  the  practical  part  of  his  work  is,  in  a  great  measure,  em 
pirical,  although  his  general  principles  (so  far  as  they  can  be  detected) 
appear  to  be  those  of  the  Dogmatic  sect.  The  great  importance  which 
was  for  a  long  time  attached  to  the  works  of  Dioscorides,  has  rendered 
them  the  subject  of  almost  innumerable  commentaries  and  criticisms, 
and  even  some  of  the  most  learned  of  our  modern  naturalists  have  not 
thought  it  an  unworthy  task  to  attempt  the  illustration  of  his  Materia 
Medica.  Upon  the  whole,  we  must  attribute  to  him  the  merit  of  great 
industry  and  patient  research ;  and  it  seems  but  just  to  ascribe  a  large 
portion  of  the  errors  and  inaccuracies  into  which  he  has  fallen,  more  to 
the  imperfect  state  of  the  science  when  he  wrote,  than  to  any  defect  in 
the  character  and  talents  of  the  writer.  With  respect  to  the  ancient 
writers  on  Materia  Medica  who  succeeded  Dioscorides,  they  were  gen 
erally  content  to  quote  his  authority,  without  presuming  to  correct  his 
errors  or  supply  his  deficiencies.  That  part  of  his  work  which  relates  to 
the  plants  growing  in  Greece  has  been  very  much  illustrated  in  the 
splendid  Flora  Graca  of  Sibthorp,  &c.,  10  vols.  fol.  Besides  the  treatise 
on  Materia  Medica,  a  few  other  works  are  generally  attributed  to  Dioscor 
ides,  some  of  which,  however,  are  spurious.2 

The  first  Greek  edition  of  Dioscorides  was  published  by  Aldus  Maimtius,  Venice,  1499, 
fol.,  and  is  said  to  be  very  scarce.  Perhaps  the  most  valuable  edition  is  that  of  Sara- 

»  Grecnhill;  Smittts  Qicf.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  a  GreenfuU,  I.  e. 


ROMAN     PERIOD  531 

cenus  (Greek  and  Latin),  Frankfort,  1598,  fol.,  with  a  copious  and  learned  commentary. 
The  last  edition  is  that  by  Sprengel  (Greek  and  Latin),  2  vols.  8vo,  Leipzig,  1829-30, 
with  a  useful  commentary,  forming  the  twenty-fifth  and  twenty-sixth  volumes  of  Kiihn's 
collection  of  the  Greek  medical  writers. 

III.  THEMISON  (Be/if craw),1  the  founder  of  the  ancient  medical  sect  of  the 
Methodici,  and  one  of  the  most  eminent  physicians  of  his  time,  was  a  na 
tive  of  Laodicea,  in  Syria.     He  was  a  pupil  of  Asclepiades  of  Bithynia, 
already  mentioned,  and  must  have  lived,  therefore,  in  the  first  century 
B.C.     He  seems  to  have  been  a  great  traveller.     He  differed  from  his 
master  on  several  points  in  his  old  age,  and  became,  as  already  remarked, 
the  founder  of  a  new  sect  called  the  "  Methodici,"  which  long  exercised 
an  extensive  influence  on  medical  science.     He  wrote  several  medical 
works,  of  which  the  titles  and  a  few  fragments  remain,  preserved  prin 
cipally  by  Caelius  Aurelianus,  in  a  Latin  form.     He  is,  perhaps,  the  first, 
physician  who  made  use  of  leeches,  and  he  is  also  said  to  have  been  him 
self  attacked  with  hydrophobia,  and  to  have  recovered. 

IV.  THESSALUS  (QeenraAA),2  a  native  of  Tralles,  in  Lydia,  remarkable 
for  his  arrogance  and  effrontery.     He  lived  at  Rome  in  the  reign  of  the 
Emperor  Nero,  A.D.  54-68,  to  whom  he  addressed  one  of  his  works.    He 
was  the  son  of  a  weaver,  and  had  followed  the  same  employment  himself 
during  his  youth.     This,  however,  he  soon  gave  up,  and,  though  he  had 
had  a  very  imperfect  general  education,  he  embraced  the  medical  profes 
sion,  by  which  he  acquired,  for  a  time,  a  great  reputation,  and  amassed 
a  large  fortune.    He  adopted  the  principles  of  the  Methodici,  but  modified 
and  developed  them  so  much,  that  he  attributed  to  himself  the  invention 
of  them,  and,  indeed,  is  always  considered  one  of  the  founders  of  the 
sect.    He  considered  himself  superior  to  all  his  predecessors,  and  assert^ 
ed  that  none  of  them  had  contributed  any  thing  to  the  advancement  of 
medical  science,  while  he  boasted  that  he  himself  could  teach  the  art  of 
healing  in  six  months.    He  is  frequently  mentioned  by  Galen,  but  always 
in  terms  of  contempt  and  ridicule.     None  of  his  works  are  extant. 

V.  SORANUS  (2&jpai/o's),  a  native  of  Ephesus,  practiced  his  profession 
first  at  Alexandrea  and  afterward  at  Rome,  in  the  reigns  of  Trajan  and 
Hadrian,  A.D.  98-138.     He  belonged  to  the  sect  of  the  Methodici,  and  was 
one  of  the  most  eminent  physicians  of  that  school.     There  are  several 
medical  works  extant  under  the  name  of  Soranus,  but  whether  they  were 
written  by  the  native  of  Ephesus  can  not  be  determined.     One  of  these, 
irepl  ywaiKeiwv  iraduv,  was  first  published  in  Greek  in  1838,  Konigsberg, 
8vo.     It  was  partly  prepared  for  the  press  by  Dietz,  and  was  finished, 
after  his  death,  by  J.  F.  Lobeck.     It  is  a  valuable  and  interesting  work, 
consisting  of  one  hundred  and  twenty-two  chapters,  with  a  few  lines  of 
the  one  hundred  and  twenty-third,  and  the  titles  of  thirty-eight  more.3 

VI.  ARET^US  ('AperaTos),  one  of  the  most  celebrated  of  the  ancient 
Greek  physicians,  of  whose  life,  however,  no  particulars  are  known. 
There  is  some  uncertainty  respecting  both  his  age  and  country,  but  it 
seems  probable  that  he  practiced  in  the  first  century  after  Christ,  in  the 
reign  of  Nero  or  Vespasian ;  and  he  is  generally  styled  "  the  Cappado- 

i  Gremhill;  Smith1*  Diet.  Bioqr.,  9.  v.  *  /<£  #.  ? 


532  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

cian"  (Kcnr7rc£5o£).  He  wrote  in  Ionic  Greek  a  general  treatise  on  dis 
eases,  which  is  still  extant,  and  is  certainly  one  of  the  most  valuable 
reliques  of  antiquity,  displaying  great  accuracy  in  the  detail  of  symptoms, 
and  in  seizing  the  diagnostic  character  of  diseases.1 

The  first  Greek  edition  of  Aretaeus  is  that  of  Goupylus,  Paris,  1554,  8vo.  In  1723,  a 
magnificent  edition  in  folio  was  published  at  the  Clarendon  press  at  Oxford,  edited  by 
Wigan,  containing  an  improved  text,  a  new  Latin  version,  learned  dissertations  and 
notes,  and  a  copious  index  by  Maittaire.  In  1731,  the  celebrated  Boerhaave  brought  out 
a  new  edition,  of  which  the  text  and  Latin  version  had  been  printed  before  the  appear 
ance  of  Wigan's,  and  are  of  less  value  than  his  :  this  edition,  however,  contains  a  copi 
ous  and  useful  collection  of  annotations  by  Petit  and  Triller.  The  last  and  most  useful 
edition  is  that  of  Kiihn,  Leipzig,  1828,  8vo,  forming  the  twenty-fourth  volume  of  the  col 
lection  of  Greek  medical  writers. 

VII.  GALENUS,  CLAUDIUS  (KAouSios  Ta.\iiv6s)?  commonly  called  GALEN, 
a  very  celebrated  physician,  whose  works  have  had  a  longer  and  more 
extensive  influence  on  the  different  branches  of  medical  science  than 
those  of  any  other  either  in  ancient  or  modern  times.  He  was  born  at 
Pergamum  in  A.D.  130.  His  father  Nicon,  who  was  an  architect  and 
geometrician,  carefully  superintended  his  education.  In  his  seventeenth 
year  (A.D.  146),  his  father,  who  had  hitherto  destined  him  to  be  a  philos 
opher,  altered  his  intentions,  and,  in  consequence  of  a  dream,  chose  for 
him  the  profession  of  medicine.  He  at  first  studied  medicine  in  his  na 
tive  city.  In  his  twentieth  year  (A.D.  149)  he  lost  his  father,  and  about 
the  same  time  he  went  to  Smyrna  for  the  purpose  of  studying  under 
Pelops  the  physician,  and  Albinus  the  Platonic  philosopher.  He  after 
ward  studied  at  Corinth  and  Alexandrea.  He  returned  to  Pergamum  in 
his  twenty-ninth  year,  A.D.  158,  and  was  immediately  appointed  physi 
cian  to  the  school  of  gladiators,  an  office  which  he  filled  with  great  repu 
tation  and  success.  In  A.D.  164,  he  quitted  his  native  country  on  account 
of  some  popular  commotions,  and  went  to  Rome  for  the  first  time.  Here 
he  stayed  about  four  years,  and  gained  great  reputation  from  his  skill  in 
anatomy  and  medicine.  He  returned  to  Pergamum  in  A.D.  168,  but  had 
scarcely  settled  there  when  he  received  a  summons  from  the  emperors 
M.  Aurelius  and  L.  Verus  to  attend  them  at  Aquileia,  in  Venetia.  From 
Aquileia,  Galen  followed  M.  Aurelius  to  Rome  in  A.D.  170.  When  the 
emperor  again  set  out  to  conduct  the  war  on  the  Danube,  Galen  with  dif 
ficulty  obtained  permission  to  be  left  behind  at  Rome,  alleging  that  such 
was  the  will  of  ^Esculapius.  Before  leaving  the  city,  the  emperor  com 
mitted  to  the  medical  care  of  Galen  his  son  Commodus,  who  was  then 
nine  years  of  age.  Galen  stayed  at  Rome  some  years,  during  which  time 
he  employed  himself  in  lecturing,  writing,  and  practicing  with  great  suc 
cess.  He  subsequently  returned  to  Pergamum,  but  whether  he  again 
visited  Rome  is  uncertain.  He  is  said  to  have  died  in  the  year  200,  at 
the  age  of  seventy,  in  the  reign  of  Septimius  Severus ;  but  it  is  not  im 
probable  that  he  lived  some  years  longer.3 

Galen's  personal  character,  as  it  appears  in  his  works,  places  him 
among  the  brightest  ornaments  of  the  heathen  world.     Perhaps  his  chief 
faults  were  too  high  an  opinion  of  his  own  merits,  and  too  much  bitter- 
>  Oreenhill;  Smith'*  Diet.  Biogr.,  ».  v.  »  Id.  ib.  *  Grtenhill,  I.  C. 


ROMAN     BERIOD.  533 

ness  and  contempt  for  some  of  his  adversaries,  for  each  of  which  failings 
the  circumstances  of  the  times  afforded  great,  if  not  sufficient  excuse. 
He  was  also  one  of  the  most  learned  and  accomplished  men  of  his  age, 
as  is  proved  not  only  by  his  extant  writings,  but  also  by  the  long  list  of 
his  works  on  various  branches  of  philosophy,  which  are  now  lost.  All 
this  may  make  us  the  more  regret  that  he  was  so  little  brought  into  con 
tact  with  Christianity,  of  which  he  appears  to  have  known  nothing  more 
than  might  be  learned  from  the  popular  conversation  of  the  day  during  a 
time  of  persecution  :  yet  in  one  of  his  lost  works,  of  which  a  fragment  is 
quoted  by  his  Arabian  biographers,  he  speaks  of  the  Christians  in  higher 
terms,  and  praises  their  temperance  and  chastity,  their  blameless  lives, 
and  love  of  virtue,  in  which  they  equalled  or  surpassed  the  philosophers 
of  the  age.1 

The  works  that  are  still  extant  under  the  name  of  Galen  consist  of 
eighty-three  treatises  acknowledged  to  be  genuine  ;  nineteen  whose  gen 
uineness  has,  with  more  or  less  reason,  been  doubted ;  forty-five  un 
doubtedly  spurious ;  nineteen  fragments ;  and  fifteen  commentaries  on 
different  works  of  Hippocrates ;  and,  besides  these,  more  than  fifty  short 
pieces  and  fragments  (many  or  most  of  which  are  probably  spurious)  are 
enumerated  as  still  lying  unpublished  in  different  European  libraries. 
Almost  all  these  treat  of  some  branch  of  medical  science,  and  many  of 
them  were  composed  at  the  request  of  his  friends,  and  without  any  view 
to  publication.  Besides  these,  however,  Galen  wrote  a  great  number  of 
works,  of  which  nothing  but  the  titles  have  been  preserved  ;  so  that,  al 
together,  the  number  of  his  distinct  treatises  can  not  have  been  less  than 
five  hundred.  Some  of  these  are  very  short,  and  he  frequently  repeats 
whole  passages,  with  hardly  any  variation,  in  different  works ;  but  still, 
when  the  number  of  his  writings  is  considered,  their  intrinsic  excellence, 
and  the  variety  of  subjects  of  which  he  treated  (extending  not  only  to 
every  branch  of  medical  science,  but  also  to  ethics,  logic,  grammar,  and 
other  departments  of  philosophy),*  he  has  always  been  justly  ranked 
among  the  greatest  authors  that  have  ever  lived.  His  style  is  elegant, 
but  diffuse  and  prolix,  and  he  abounds  in  allusions  to  and  quotations  from 
the  ancient  Greek  poets,  philosophers,  and  historians. 

At  the  time  when  Galen  began  to  devote  himself  to  the  study  of  medi 
cine,  the  profession  was  divided  into  several  sects,  which  were  constant 
ly  disputing  with  each  other.  The  Dogmatici  and  Empirici  had  for  sev 
eral  centuries  been  opposed  to  each  other.  In  the  first  century  B.C.  had 
arisen  the  sect  of  the  Methodici ;  and  shortly  before  Galen's  own  time 
had  been  founded  those  of  the  Eclectici,  Pneumatici,  and  Episynthetici. 
Galen  attached  himself  exclusively  to  none  of  these  sects,  but  chose  from 
the  tenets  of  each  what  he  believed  to  be  good  and  true,  and  called  those 
persons  slaves  who  designated  themselves  as  followers  of  Hippocrates, 
Praxagoras,  or  any  other  man.  In  his  general  principles,  however,  he 
may  be  considered  as  belonging  to  the  Dogmatic  sect,  for  his  method  was 
to  reduce  all  his  knowledge,  as  acquired  by  the  observation  of  facts,  to 
general  theoretical  principles.  These  principles  he  indeed  professed  to 
i  Greenhill,  I.  c. 


534 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


deduce  from  experience  and  observation ;  and  we  have  abundant  proofs 
of  his  diligence  in  collecting  experience,  and  his  accuracy  in  making  ob 
servations  ;  but  still,  in  a  certain  sense  at  least,  he  regards  individual 
facts  and  the  detail  of  experience  as  of  little  value,  unconnected  with  the 
principles  which  he  laid  down  as  the  basis  of  all  medical  reasoning.  In 
this  fundamental  point,  therefore,  the  method  pursued  by  Galen  appears 
to  have  been  directly  the  reverse  of  that  which  is  now  considered  the 
correct  method  of  scientific  investigation  ;  and  yet  such  is  the  force  of 
natural  genius,  that  in  most  instances  he  attained  the  ultimate  object  in 
view,  although  by  an  indirect  path.1 

No  one  has  ever  set  before  the  medical  profession  a  higher  standard 
of  perfection  than  Galen,  and  few,  if  any,  have  more  nearly  approached 
it  in  their  own  person.  He  evidently  appears  from  his  works  to  have 
been  a  most  accomplished  and  learned  man,  and  one  of  his  short  essays 
is  written  to  inculcate  the  necessity  of  a  physician  being  acquainted  with 
other  branches  of  knowledge  besides  merely  medicine.  Of  his  numerous 
philosophical  writings  the  greater  part  are  lost ;  but  his  celebrity  in  logic 
and  metaphysics  appears  to  have  been  great  among  the  ancients,  as  he 
is  mentioned  in  company  with  Plato  and  Aristotle  by  his  contemporary 
Alexander  Aphrodisiensis.  He  was  most  attached  to  the  Peripatetic 
school,  to  which  he  often  accommodated  the  maxims  of  the  Old  Academy.* 
Some  account  of  the  edition  of  Galen's  works,  in  conjunction  with  those  of  Hippo 
crates,  by  Chartier,  has  already  been  given  on  page  357  of  this  volume.  The  latest  and 
most  commodious  edition  of  Galen  is  that  by  Kiihn,  Leipzig,  1821-1833,  20  vols.  8vo.  Its 
real  critical  merits,  however,  are  very  small.  For  the  correction  of  the  Greek  text  little 
or  nothing  has  been  done  by  Kiihn,  except  in  the  case  of  a  few  particular  treatises,  and 
all  Chartier's  notes,  and  various  readings,  are  omitted.  Kiihn  has  likewise  left  out  many 
of  the  spurious  works  contained  in  Chartier's  edition,  as  also  the  fragments,  and  those 
books  which  are  extant  only  in  Latin ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  he  has  published  for  the 
first  time  the  Greek  text  of  the  treatise  De  Musculorum  Dissectione,  the  Synopsis  Libro- 
rum  de  Pulsibus>  and  the  commentary  on  Hippocrates  De  Humoribus.  Upon  the  whole, 
the  writings  of  Galen  are  still  in  a  very  corrupt  and  unsatisfactory  state,  and  it  is  uni 
versally  acknowledged  that  a  new  and  critical  edition  is  much  wanted. 

VIII.  Two  treatises  have  come  down  to  us,  which  have  been  ascribed 
to  Alexander  Aphrodisiensis,  of  Aphrodisias,  in  Caria,  and  the  most  cele 
brated  of  the  commentators  on  Aristotle.     The  first  is  entitled  'larpiKa 
>Airop'f)fJLa,Ta  Kal  &vfftKa  IlpojSx^jttoTo,  or   Quastiones  Medic&  et  Problemata 
Physica;  the  second  is  Uepl  Uvperwu,  or  De  Febribus.     There  are  very 
strong  reasons,  however,  for  believing  both  to  be  the  productions  of  some 
later  writer.     By  some  they  are  ascribed  to  Alexander  Trallianus,  who 
flourished  in  the  sixth  century  after  Christ. 

The  Greek  text  of  the  first  of  these  treatises  is  to  be  found  in  the  Aldine  edition  of 
Aristotle's  works,  Venice,  1495,  fol.,  and  in  that  by  Sylburgius,  Frankfort,  1585,  8vo.  It 
is  also  invserted  in  the  first  volume  of  Ideler's  Physici  et  Medici  Greed  Minores,  Berlin, 
1841,  8vo.  The  Greek  text  of  the  second  treatise  first  appeared  in  the  Cambridge  Muse 
um  Criticum,  vol.  ii.,  p.  359,  seqq.,  transcribed  by  Demetrius  Schinas,  from  a  manuscript 
at  Florence.  It  was  published,  together  with  Valla's  translation,  by  Passow,  Breslau, 
1822,  4to,  and  also  in  Passow's  Opuscula  Academica,  Leipzig,  1835,  8vo.  The  Greek  text 
alone  is  contained  in  the  first  volume  of  Ideler's  work,  already  mentioned. 

IX.  One  other  physician  alone  remains  to  be  mentioned  here,  although 
i  GrcenMl,  L  c.  >  Id.  ib. 


ROMAN     PERIOD.  535 

the  work  which  he  has  left  behind  him  is  only  remotely  connected  with 
medical  science.  This  is  ARTEMIDORUS,'  surnamed,  for  distinction'  sake, 
Daldianus,  from  the  circumstance  of  his  mother  having  been  born  at  Dal- 
dia  or  Daldis,  a  small  town  of  Lydia.  He  lived  at  Rome  in  the  reign  of 
Antoninus  Pius  and  M.  Aurelius,  as  we  may  infer  from  several  passages 
of  his  work,2  though  some  writers  have  placed  him  in  the  reign  of  Con- 
stantine.  Artemidorus  is  the  author  of  a  work  on  the  ^interpretation  of 
dreams,  entitled  'OetpoK/>m/ca,  in  five  books,  which  is  still  extant.  He 
collected  the  materials  for  this  work  by  very  extensive  reading  (he  as 
serts  that  he  had  read  all  the  books  on  the  subject),  on  his  travels  through 
Asia,  Greece,  Italy,  and  the  Grecian  islands.3  He  himself  intimates  that 
he  had  written  several  works,  and,  from  Suidas  and  Eudocia,  we  may  in 
fer  that  one  was  called  oiwoffKoiriKa.,  and  the  other  x*lP0<rKO''riK<*'  Along 
with  his  occupations  on  these  subjects,  he  also  practiced  as  a  physician. 
In  his  work  on  dreams,  his  object  is  to  prove  that  in  dreams  the  future  is 
revealed  to  man,  and  to  clear  the  science  of  interpreting  them  from  the 
abuses  with  which  the  fashion  of  the  time  had  surrounded  it.  He  does 
not  attempt,  however,  to  establish  his  opinion  by  philosophical  reasoning, 
but  by  appealing  to  facts  partly  recorded  in  history,  partly  derived  from 
oral  tradition  of  the  people,  and  partly  from  his  own  experience.  On  the 
last  point  he  places  great  reliance,  especially  as  he  believed  that  he  was 
called  to  the  task  by  Apollo.  This  makes  him  conceited,  and  raises  him 
above  all  fear  of  censure.  The  style  of  the  work  is  simple,  correct,  and 
elegant,  and  this,  together  with  the  circumstance  that  Artemidorus  has 
often  occasion  to  allude  to  or  explain  ancient  manners  and  usages,  gives 
to  it  a  peculiar  value.  The  work  has  also  great  interest,  because  it  shows 
us  in  what  manner  the  ancients  symbolized  and  interpreted  certain  events 
of  ordinary  life,  which,  when  well  understood,  throws  light  on  various 
points  of  ancient  mythology. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Oneirocritica  is  that  of  Aldus,  Venice,  1518,  8vo ;  the  next  is 
that  of  Rigaltius,  Paris,  1603,  4to,  containing  a  raluable  commentary,  which  goes  down, 
however,  only  to  the  sixty-eighth  chapter  of  the  second  book.  The  last  edition  is  that 
of  Reiff,  Leipzig,  1805, 2  vols.  8vo.  It  contains  the  notes  of  Rigaltius,  and  some  by  Reiske 
and  the  editor.  In  1821,  Benedict  published  his  "  Notae  critical  ad  Artemidori  Oneiro 
critica,"  Schneeberg,  8vo. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.        a  Oneirocr.,  i.,  28,  66 ;  i?.,  1.        3  Ibid.,  procem.,  lib.  i. 


536  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


CHAPTER  LI  I. 

SEVENTH   OR   BYZANTINE    PERIOD. 
INTRODUCTORY     REMARKS.1 

I.  THE  translation  of  the  seat  of  empire  from  Rome  to  Constantinople 
was  the  beginning  of  a  new  order  of  things.     Christianity,  viewed  at  first 
with  indifference  by  a  people  who  professed  the  greatest  toleration,  but 
who  confounded  it  with  the  Jewish  worship,  the  object  of  their  contempt ; 
persecuted  and  tolerated  in  turn  by  successive  emperors ;   and  finally 
raised  to  the  throne  in  the  person  of  Constantine,  had  now  become  the 
dominant  religion  of  the  state.     Its  influence  on  all  the  branches  of  liter 
ature  and  science  gave  a  new  form  to  most  of  them,  while  it  produced 
others  entirely  new,  particularly  those  connected  with  theological  specu 
lation,  into  which  the  nature  of  our  subject,  however,  does  not  permit  us 
to  enter. 

II.  Apart  from  the  zealous  labors  of  the  Christian  writers  in  their  new 
field  of  inquiry,  literature  was  now  rapidly  on  the  decline,  although  sev 
eral  of  the  cities  in  which  it  had  hitherto  flourished  still  retained,  for  a 
time,  a  portion  of  their  former  celebrity.     Athens,  for  instance,  still  pos 
sessed  philosophers,  who  explained  in  their  public  lectures  the  writings 
of  Plato  and  Aristotle,  until  the  edict  of  Justinian  closed  their  schools,  and 
drove  them  into  the  East.     This  same  city  had  also  its  schools  of  gram 
marians  and  rhetoricians.     Constantinople  had  similar  establishments 
for  the  culture  of  the  liberal  arts,  and  also  for  jurisprudence  ;  Alexandrea 
had  again  become  the  abode  of  the  sciences  ;  and  Berytus  flourished  with 
its  school  of  law  ;  but  the  true  spirit  of  literature  had  departed,  and  the 
fall  of  the  Eastern  empire  buried  the  whole  fabric  in  its  ruins.2 

III.  At  what  time  the  ancient  Greek  may  be  said  to  have  ceased  as  a 
living  language,  and  the  modern  or  Romaic  tongue  to  have  taken  its 
place,  is  difficult  to  determine.     It  may  be  dated,  perhaps,  from  the  sev 
enth  and  eighth  centuries  of  our  era,  as  far  as  Greece  itself  was  concern 
ed,  when  the  country  was  permanently  occupied  by  Sclavonic  settlers. 
The  extent  of  the  transformation  which  ensued  is*  most  clearly  proved 
by  the  number  of  new  names  which  succeeded  to  those  of  the  ancient 
geography.     But  it  is  also  described  by  historians  in  terms  which  have 
suggested  to  many  the  belief  that  the  native  population  was  utterly  swept 
away,  and  that  the  modern  Greeks  are  the  descendants  of  barbarous 
tribes,  which  subsequently  became  subject  to  the  empire,  and  received 
the  language  and  religion  which  they  have  since  retained  from  Byzantine 
missionaries  and  Anatolian  colonists.     The  expression  of  Constantine 
Porphyrogenitus3  is  worthy  of  notice,  when  he  says  eV0Aoj8w077  iratra  y  x<>>- 

1  Scholl,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  vi.,  p.  ],  seqq.  2  Id.  itt. 

3  De  Them.,  ii.,  6.     Compare  Thirlwall,  Hist.  Gr.,  vol.  viii.,  p.  471,  note. 


BYZANTINE      PERIOD.  537 

pa,  ttal  76701/6  )8ap/3apos,  "  The  whole  country  was  Slavonized,  and  became 
barbarian." 

IV.  In  considering  the  literature  of  the  present  period,  we  shall  confine 
ourselves  to  very  narrow  limits,  the  more  especially  as  the  Christian 
writers  (considered  as  such)  do  not  fall  within  the  scope  of  our  work. 
We  shall  content  ourselves,  therefore,  with  an  enumeration  of  the  differ 
ent  writers  of  this  period,  and  a  brief  sketch  merely  of  the  most  import 
ant  among  them. 


CHAPTER  LIII. 
SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD— continued. 

POETRY. 
I.     EPIGRAM.1 

I.  THE  epigrammatic  poets  of  this  period  were  quite  numerous,  though 
few  of  them  possessed  any  great  degree  of  merit.     The  principal  ones 
among  them  were  the  Emperor  JULIAN,  APOLLINARIUS  of  Laodicea,  PAL- 
LADAS  of  Chalcis,  PAULUS  SILENTIARIUS,  and  AGATHIAS  of  Myrina,  in  JCoHs. 

II.  Of  the  Emperor  JULIAN  we  have  three  epigrams  remaining,  one  of 
them  directed  against  beer  (ds  oivov  a-rrb  /cpiflfjs),  as  wishing  to  usurp  the 
place  of  wine.     APOLLINARIUS,  probably  the  friend  and  correspondent  of 
Libanius,  has  left  us  two  biting  epigrams,  one  of  them  on  a  bad  gramma 
rian  and  rhetorician.     PALLADAS  is  the  author  of  a  large  number  of  epi 
grams  in  the  Anthology,  which  some  scholars  consider  the  best  in  the 
collection,  while  others  regard  them  as  almost  worthless ;  but  the  real 
characteristic  of  which  is  an  elegant  mediocrity.     PAULUS  SILENTIARIUS, 
so  called  because  he  was  the  chief  0*f  the  Silentiarii.  or  secretaries  of  the 
Emperor  Justinian,  and  to  whom  we  shall  presently  again  refer,  wrote 
eighty-three  epigrams,  given  in  the  Anthology,  and  among  which  is  im 
properly  numbered  a  poem  On  the  Pythian  Baths  (ets  ra  cv  Tlvdiois  bepfjia). 
Of  AGATHIAS,  mention  has  already  been  made  in  our  account  of  the  An 
thologies. 

II.  OTHER  DEPARTMENTS  OF  POETRY. 

III.  The  other  poets  of  this  period  were  NAUMACHIUS,  MAXIMUS,  DORO- 
THEUS,  HELIODORUS,  NONNUS,  PROCLUS,  MUSJEUS,  COLUTHUS,  TRYPHIODORUS, 
and  PAULUS  SILENTIARIUS.     We  shall  enlarge  on  the  most  important  of 
these. 

IV.  NONNUS  (NcWos),2  a  native  of  Panopolis.  in  Egypt,  seems  to  have 
lived  shortly  before  the  time  of  Agathias,  who  mentions  him  among  the 
recent  (vfoi)  poets.    He  must  be  assigned,  therefore,  to  the  sixth  century 
of  the  Christian  era.     Respecting  the  events  of  his  life,  nothing  is  known 
except  that  he  was  a  Christian.     He  was  the  author  of  an  enormous 
poem,  which  has  come  down  to  us,  under  the  title  of  Aiowa-iaxd  or  Bao-<rap- 
md,  and  consists  of  forty-eight  books.     As  the  subject  of  the  poem  is  a 

*  SWtotf,  Hiat.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  vi.,  p.  36,  seqq.  »  Smiik,  Diet.  Biogr.,  ».  v. 


538  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

pagan  divinity,  and  a  number  of  mythological  stories  are  introduced,  some 
writers  have  imagined  that  it  was  composed  by  him  previous  to  his  con 
version  to  Christianity.  There  appears,  however,  to  be  no  good  ground 
for  this  opinion.  The  poem  itself  shows  that  Nonnus  had  no  idea  what 
ever  of  what  a  poetical  composition  should  be,  and  it  is  more  like  a  chaos 
than  a  literary  production,  the  incidents  being  patched  together  with  little 
or  no  coherence.  The  style  is  bombastic  and  inflated  in  the  highest  de 
gree  ;  but  the  author  shows  considerable  learning  and  fluency  of  narra 
tion.  A  second  work  of  Nonnus,  which  has  all  the  defects  of  the  first, 
is  a  paraphrase  of  the  Gospel  of  St.  John,  in  hexameter  verse.  There  is 
also  a  collection  and  exposition  of  various  stories  and  fables  ascribed  to 
Nonnus,  but  Bentley  has  shown  that  this  collection  is  the  production  of  a 
far  more  ignorant  person. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Dionysiaca  is  that  of  Falckenburg,  Antwerp,  1569,  4to.  In  1605, 
an  octavo  edition,  with  a  Latin  translation,  appeared  at  Hanau.  A  reprint  of  it,  with  a 
dissertation  by  D.  Heinsius,  and  emendations  by  Joseph  Scaliger,  was  published  at  Ley- 
den  in  1610,  8vo.  The  latest  and  best  edition,  however,  is  that  of  Graefe,  with  a  critical 
commentary,  Leipzig,  1819-26,  2  vols.  8vo.  Of  the  Paraphrase  of  St.  John,  the  best  edi 
tions  are  that  of  D.  Heinsius,  Leyden,  1627,  8vo,  and  Passow,  Leipzig,  1834,  8vo. 

V.  Mus^us  (Movcraios),  not  to  be  confounded  with  the  earlier  bard  of 
the  same  name,  was  a  poet  and  grammarian,  who,  according  to  the  most 
correct  opinion,  did  not  live  earlier  than  the  fifth  century  of  our  era.    He 
is  the  author  of  the  poem  on  the  loves  of  Hero  and  Leander.     The  gen 
eral  style  of  this  production  is  quite  different  from  the  simplicity  of  the 
older  poets,  and  several  individual  expressions  betray  the  lateness  of  its 
origin. 

Numerous  editions  of  this  poem  have  been  published.  The  best  are  those  of  Teucher, 
Leipzig,  1789,  Halle,  1801  ;  of  Passow,  Leipzig,  1810,  8vo  ;  of  Schaefer,  Leipzig,  1825, 
8vo  ;  and  of  Lehrs,  along  with  Hesiod,  Apollonius  Rhodius,  Tryphiodorus,  &c.,  in  Didot's 
Bibliotheca  Graeca,  Paris,  1840. 

VI.  COLUTHUS  (Ko'Aoyflos)1  was  a  native  of  Lycopolis,  in  Upper  Egypt, 
and  flourished  under  the  Emperor  Anastasius,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
sixth  century  of  our  era.     He  wrote  laudatory  poems  (fjKw/j.ia  Si'  tVajf), 
an  heroic  poem,  in  six  books,  entitled  KaAuSoi/jKci,  and  another  entitled 
UepariKa.     These  are  all  lost  ;   but  his  poem  on  "  the  Rape  of  Helen" 
('EAeV?js  apiray}])  was  discovered,  with  Quintus  Smyrnaeus,  by  Cardinal 
Bessarion,  in  Calabria.    It  consists  of  three  hundred  and  ninety-two  hex 
ameter  lines,  and  is  an  unsuccessful  imitation  of  Homer. 

The  best  editions  of  Coluthus  are  those  of  Bekker,  Berlin,  1816,  8vo  ;  of  Schaefer,  Leip 
zig,  1825,  8vo  ;  and  of  Lehrs,  along  with  Hesiod,  Apollonius  Rhodius,  Tryphiodorus,  &c., 
in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  Paris,  1840. 


VII.  TRYPHIODORUS  (TpvQidSupos),2  a  poet  and  grammarian,  was  a  na 
tive  of  Egypt,  but  nothing  is  known  of  his  personal  history.  He  is  sup 
posed  to  have  lived  in  the  fifth  century  of  the  Christian  era.  The  only 
one  of  several  poems  of  his  that  has  come  down  to  us  is  that  entitled 
*I\iou  aAoxns,  consisting  of  six  hundred  and  ninety-one  lines.  From  the 
small  dimensions  of  it,  it  is  necessarily  little  more  than  a  sketch.  It  is 
not,  like  the  poem  of  Quintus  Smyrnaeus,  a  continuation  of  the  Iliad  ;  it  is 
1  -Smith)  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  -.  J  Id.  ib.  ' 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  539 

an  independent  poem,  but  still  a  production  of  very  little  merit.  After  a 
brief  indication  of  the  subject,  there  follows  a  meagre  recapitulation  of 
some  of  the  chief  events  since  the  death  of  Hector,  given  in  the  clumsiest 
and  most  confused  manner.  The  proper  subject  of  the  poem  begins  with 
the  account  of  the  building  of  the  wooden  horse. 

The  best  editions  are  that  of  Northmore,  Cambridge,  1791,  and  London,  1804,  8vo  ; 
of  Schaefer,  Leipzig,  1808,  fol.  maj.,  a  splendid  edition,  of  which  only  forty  copies  were 
printed;  and  that  of  Wernicke,  Leipzig,  1819,  8vo. 

VIII.  PAULUS  SILENTIARIUS,  already  mentioned  as  an  epigrammatic 
poet,  wrote  likewise  various  other  poems,  of  which  the  following  are  ex 
tant:   1.  "EiKtypaffis  TOV  yaov  TTJS  ayias  2o$uxs,  Description  of  the  Church  of 
St.  Sophia,  consisting  of  one  thousand  and  twenty-nine  verses,  of  which 
the  first  one  hundred  and  thirty-four  are  iambic,  the  rest  hexameter.    The 
description  is  praised  as  accurate  and  clear,  and  the  versification  is  not 
deficient  in  elegance.     2.  "E/c^atns  TOV  fyfiwos,  Description  of  the  Pulpit, 
consisting  of  three  hundred  and  four  verses,  of  which  the  first  twenty- 
nine  are  iambic,  and  the  rest  hexameter.     It  is,  in  fact,  a  second  part  of 
the  former. 

The  best  editions  of  both  these  poems  are  that  of  Graefe,  Leipzig,  1822,  8vo,  and  that 
of  Bekker,  in  the  Bonn  edition  of  the  Byzantine  historians,  1837,  8vo. 

IX.  Paulus  Silentiarius  may  be  regarded  as  the  last  of  the  poets  of  this 
period  in  whom  any  spark  of  true  poetic  talent  displayed  itself.     Those 
that  remain  were  mere  versifiers,  such  as  GEORGIUS  PISIDES,  THEODORUS 

DlACONUS,  CoNSTANTINE  PsELLUS,  THEODORUS  PfiODROMUS,  JOANNES  TzETZ- 

ES,  MANUEL  PHILES,  JOANNES  PEDIASMUS.  Of  these  we  will  notice  the 
principal  ones. 

X.  GEORGIUS  PISIDES/  or  George  of  Pisidia,  flourished  in  the  time  of 
the  Emperor  Heraclius  (who  reigned  from  A.D.  610  to  641).     In  the  MSS. 
of  his  works  he  is  described  as  a  deacon  and  XaprocpvXa^  or  "  record- 
keeper,"  and  2/cevo<£vAo|,  or  "keeper  of  the  sacred  vessels"  of  the  Church 
of  St.  Sophia,  at  Constantinople.    He  wrote  various  poems,  some  of  which 
have  come  down  to  us.    Among  the  latter  we  may  mention  "  the  Expedi 
tion  of  Heraclius  against  the  Persians,"  in  three  books,  containing  one 
thousand  and  ninety-eight  verses,  and  composed  in  iambic  trimeters ; 
another  "  on  the  Invasion  of  the  Avars,"  and  the  attack  made  by  them  on 
Constantinople  during  the  absence  of  Heraclius.    It  consists  of  one  book 
of  six  hundred  and  forty-one  iambic  trimeters  ;  and  a  third  poem,  entitled 
'E£ai7,uepoj/  3)  Kotr^oupy/a,  "  On  the  Creation,"  in  one  thousand  nine  hundred 
and  ten  iambic  trimeters.     The  versification  of  Georgius  is  correct  and 
elegant,  and  inharmonious  verses  are  very  rare.    But  his  poems,  however 
polished,  are  frequently  dull. 

The  poems  on  the  Expedition  against  the  Persians  and  the  Invasion  of  the  Avars  are 
edited  by  Bekker,  in  the  Bonn  reprint  of  the  Byzantine  writers.  The  Hexaemeron  is  best 
edited  in  the  BMiotheca  Patrum,  1654,  fol.,  vol.  xiv.,  p.  389.  seqq. 

XL  CONSTANTINUS  PsELLus*  flourished  in  the  eleventh  century  of  our 
era.  He  was  born  at  Constantinople,  of  a  consular  and  patrician  family, 
A.D.  1020.  He  studied  at  Athens,  and  excelled  in  all  the  learning  of  the 
t.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  *  Id.  t>. 


540  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

age,  so  that  he  was  a  proficient  at  once  in  theology,  jurisprudence,  phys 
ics,  mathematics,  philosophy,  and  history.  He  taught  philosophy,  rhet 
oric,  and  dialectics  at  Constantinople,  where  he  stood  forth  as  almost 
the  last  upholder  of  the  falling  cause  of  learning.  The  emperors  honored 
him  with  the  title  of  "  Prince  of  the  Philosophers"  (<pi\o<r6(^uv  fora-ros). 
He  was  not  only  the  most  accomplished  scholar,  but  also  the  most  volu 
minous  writer  of  the  age.  His  works,  a  great  number  of  which  are  still 
unedited,  are  both  in  prose  and  poetry,  on  a  vast  variety  of  subjects. 

We  will  specify  here  only  a  few  editions  of  parts  of  his  poetical  works.  The  Synop 
sis  legum,  versibus  iambis  et  politicis,  &c.,  is  best  edited  by  Zeucher,  Leipzig,  1789,  8vo, 
and  in  the  Auctores  Grceci  Minores,  vol.  ii.,  Leipzig,  1796.  The  Paraphrasis  in  Cantica 
Canticorum  was  edited  by  Meursius,  Leyden,  1617,  4to,  and  is  also  given  in  the  Paris 
Bibliotheca  Patrum,  vol.  xiii.,  p.  681,  seqq.  The  De  Vitiis  et  Virtutibus,  &c.,  in  iambic 
verse,  appeared  with  the  Allegories  of  Heraclides  Ponticus,  at  Basle,  1544,  8vo.  The 
Carmen  lambicum  in  depositionem  Joh.  Chrysostomi  was  given  in  the  Excerpta  of  Leo  Al- 
latius,  Rome,  1641,  8vo. 

XII.  THEODORUS  PRODROME,*  a  monk,  lived  in  the  first  half  of  the 
twelfth  century.     He  was  held  in  great  repute  by  his  contemporaries  as 
a  scholar  and  philosopher.     He  wrote  upon  a  variety  of  subjects,  philos 
ophy,  grammar,  theology,  history,  and  astronomy,  and,  in  particular,  was 
a  somewhat  prolific  poet.    Among  his  poetical  productions  we  may  men 
tion,  1.  A  Metrical  Romance,  in  nine  books,  on  the  loves  of  Rhodanthe  and 
Dosicles.     It  is  written  in  iambic  verse,  and  exhibits  very  little  ability. 
There  is  no  natural  progress  in  the  action,  no  unity  in  the  characters. 
2.  Galeomyomachia,  a  poem  in  iambic  verse,  on  "  the  Battle  of  the  Mice 
and  Cat,"  in  imitation  of  the  Batrachomyomachia.    3.  A  poem  on  Friendship, 
in  iambic  senarii.     4.  A  poem  addressed  to  the  Emperor  Manuel  Com- 
nenus,  in  which  he  complains  of  his  poverty.     5.  Epigrammata,  consisting 
of  poetical  summaries  of  the  subject-matter  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  Book 
of  Joshua,  &c. 

There  is  only  one  edition  of  the  Metrical  Romance,  namely,  that  of  Gaulmin,  Paris, 
1625.  The  Galeomyomachia  is  often  appended  to  the  editions  of  _<Esop  and  Babrius.  It 
has  also  been  edited  by  Ilgen,  in  connection  with  the  Homeric  hymns,  Halle,  1796.  The 
poem  on  Friendship  has  been  frequently  appended  to  the  editions  of  Stobaeus.  It  was 
also  printed  separately  by  Morel,  Paris,  1549,  as  well  as  by  others.  The  poem  to  Man 
uel  Comnenus  is  given  in  the  first  volume  of  Coraes'  Atakta,  Paris,  1828.  The  Epigram- 
mata  were  published  first  at  Basle,  1536,  and  afterward  at  Angers,  1632. 

XIII.  JOANNES  TZETZESTS  a  Greek  grammarian  and  poet  of  Constanti 
nople,  flourished  about  A.D.  1150.     His  writings  bear  evident  traces  of 
the  extent  of  his  acquirements  in  literature,  science,  and  philosophy,  and 
not  less  of  the  inordinate  conceit  with  which  they  had  filled  him.     He 
wrote  a  vast  number  of  works,  of  which  several  are  still  extant.    Of  these 
the  two  following  are  the  most  important:  1.  'lAm/ca  (Iliaca),  consisting 
properly  of  three  poems,  collected  into  one,  with  the  titles  Ta  irpb  'O^pov, 
ra  'Ofj.-f)povj  Kal  TO.  \*.s&  "O/jLtipov.     The  whole  amounts  to  one  thousand  six 
hundred  and  seventy-six  lines,  and  is  written  in  hexameter  verse.     The 
first  contains  the  whole  Iliac  cycle,  from  the  birth  of  Paris  to  the  tenth 
year  of  the  siege,  when  the  Iliad  begins.     The  second  consists  of  an 
abridgment  of  the  Iliad.    The  third,  like  the  work  of  Quintus  Smyrnaeus, 

1  Smith,  DitX.  Biogr.i  9.  t>,  »  Id.  tb. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  541 

is  devoted  to  the  occurrences  which  took  place  between  the  death  of 
Hector  and  the  return  of  the  Greeks.  It  is  a  very  dull  composition  ;  all 
the  merits  that  are  to  be  found  in  which  should  be  ascribed  to  the  earlier 
poets,  from  whom  Tzetzes  derived  his  materials.  2.  XtAmSes  (Chiliades), 
consisting,  in  its  present  form,  of  twelve  thousand  six  hundred  and  sixty- 
one  lines.  The  name  Chiliades  was  given  to  it  by  the  first  editor,  Ger- 
belius,  who  divided  it,  without  reference  to  the  contents,  into  thirteen 
divisions  of  one  thousand  lines,  the  last  being  incomplete.  Tzetzes  him 
self  called  it  Bip\os  IffropiK-ft,  and  divided  it  into  three  wtWes,  as  he 
termed  them.  Its  subject-matter  is  of  the  most  miscellaneous  kind,  but 
embraces  chiefly  mythological  and  historical  narratives,  arranged  under 
sepaiate  titles,  but  without  any  farther  connection.  The  following  are  a 
few  of  them  as  they  occur :  Croesus,  Midas,  Gyges,  Codrus,  Alcmaeon, 
the  sons  of  Boreas,  Euphorbus,  &c.  It  is  written  in  bad  Greek,  in  what 
is  termed  political,  or  popular  verse.  It  contains  a  great  deal  of  valuable 
and  curious  information,  though,  as  Heyne  has  shown,  the  bulk  of  it  was 
obtained  by  Tzetzes  at  second  hand.  The  brother  of  John  Tzetzes  was 
ISAAC  TZETZES,  author  of  the  commentary  on  the  Cassandra  of  Lycophron. 

Of  the  editions  of  the  Iliaca  we  may  mention  that  of  Jacobs,  Leipzig,  1793,  and  that 
of  Bekker,  Berlin,  1816.  The  latter  is  the  more  correct,  and  is  reprinted  by  Lehrs  at  tho 
end  of  his  edition  of  Hesiod,  Apollonius,  &c.,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graca,  Paris,  1840. 
Of  the  Chiliades  the  best  edition  is  that  of  Kiessling,  Leipzig,  1826,  though  much  still  re 
quires  to  be  done. 

XIV.  MANUEL  PHILES  or  PHILE,  a  native  of  Ephesus,  but  a  resident  of 
Constantinople,  was  born  A.D.  1275,  and  died  about  1340.  His  poem 
TTfpl  £uwv  l8t6TifTos  (De  Animalium  Proprielatey,  chiefly  extracted  from 
.Elian,  and  in  iambic  verse,  is  edited  by  De  Pauw,  Utrecht,  1739,  and  with 
a  revised  text  by  Lehrs  and  Diibner,  forming  part  of  the  volume  contain 
ing  Ameis's  edition  of  the  Bucolic  poets,  in  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Graca, 
Paris,  1846. 


CHAPTER  LIV. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD— continued. 
PROSE. 

SOPHISTS,1    ETC. 

I.  A  few  only  of  the  Sophists  of  this  period  will  require  our  attention. 
These  are  ULPIAN  of  Antioch,  THEMISTIUS,  LIBANIUS,  HIMERIUS,  the  Em 
peror  JULIANUS,  PRO^RESIUS,  BASILIUS. 

II.  ULPIANUS*  of  Antioch  lived  in  the  time  of  Constantine  the  Great, 
and  wrote  several  rhetorical  works.     The  name  of  Ulpianus  is  prefixed 
to  extant  commentaries  in  Greek,  on  eighteen  of  the  orations  of  Demo 
sthenes,  and  it  is  usually  stated  that  they  were  written  by  Ulpian  of  An 
tioch.     But  Suidas  does  not  mention  these  commentaries  at  all ;  and  it 
is  evident  that  in  their  present  form  they  are  of  much  later  origin.     The 

i  5b*»fl,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr,,  v&l.  vi.,  p,  140,  46ft.  »  Smitf,  Diet.  PiOfr.,  9,  t>. 


542  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

commentaries  may  originally  have  been  written  by  one  of  the  sophists  of 
the  name  (for  Suidas  mentions  also  two  others,  one  of  Gaza,  and  the 
other  of  Emesa) ;  but  they  have  received  numerous  additions  and  inter 
polations  from  some  grammarian  of  a  very  late  period.  This  is  the  opinion 
of  F.  A.  Wolf,  who  remarks  that  there  are  scarcely  twenty  passages  in 
Demosthenes  in  which  the  writer  throws  light  upon  difficulties,  which 
could  not  be  equally  well  explained  without  his  aid.  These  commentaries 
are  given  in  the  different  editions  of  Demosthenes,  and  also  in  the  col 
lections  of  the  Attic  orators. 

III.  THEMISTIUS  (©e/jur-nos),1  a  distinguished  philosopher  and  rhetori 
cian,  was  a  Paphlagonian,  and  flourished,  first  at  Constantinople,  and 
afterward  at  Rome,  in  the  reigns  of  Constantine,  Julian,  Jovian,  Valens, 
Gratian,  and  Theodosius.     He  enjoyed  the  favor  of  all  those  emperors, 
and  was  promoted  by  them  to  the  highest  honors  of  the  state.     After 
holding  various  public  offices,  and  being  employed  on  many  public  em 
bassies,  he  was  made  prefect  of  Constantinople  by  Theodosius,  A.D.  384. 
So  great  was  the  confidence  reposed  in  him  by  Theodosius,  that,  though 
Themistius  was  a  heathen,  the  emperor  intrusted  his  son  Arcadius  to  the 
tutorship  of  the  philosopher.    The  life  of  Themistius  probably  did  not  ex 
tend  beyond  A.D.  390.     Besides  the  emperors,  he  numbered  among  his 
friends  the  chief  orators  and  philosophers  of  the  age,  Christian  as  well  as 
heathen.     Not  only  Libanius,  but  Gregory  of  Nazianzus  also,  was  his 
friend  and  correspondent,  and  the  latter,  in  an  epistle  still  extant,  calls 
him  the  "  king  of  arguments."     The  orations  (TTO\ITIKOI  \6yoi)  of  Themis 
tius,  extant  in  the  time  of  Photius,  were  thirty-six  in  number,  of  which 
thirty-three  have  come  down  to  us  in  the  original  Greek,  and  one  in  a 
Latin  version.     The  other  two  were  supposed  to  be  lost,  until  one  of 
them  was  discovered  by  Mai  in  the  Ambrosian  library  at  Milan  in  1816. 
His  philosophical  works  must  have  been  very  voluminous,  for  Photius 
tells  us  that  he  wrote  commentaries  on  all  the  books  of  Aristotle,  and 
that  there  were  also  exegetical  labors  of  his  on  Plato. 

The  best  edition  of  the  orations  is  that  of  Dindorf,  Leipzig,  1832,  8vo.  The  edilio 
prmceps  of  the  Greek  text  is  that  of  Aldus,  1534,  fol.,  containing  the  philosophical  works 
that  remain,  and  also  eight  orations.  There  has  been  no  subsequent  edition  of  the 
whole  works. 

IV.  LIBANIUS  (Ai/Stwos),2  a  distinguished  sophist  and  rhetorician,  was 
born  at  Antioch  about  A.D.  314.    'He  studied  at  Athens,  where  he  im 
bibed  an  ardent  love  for  the  great  classical  writers  of  Greece ;  and  he 
afterward  set  up  a  private  school  of  rhetoric  at  Constantinople,  which 
was  attended  by  so  large  a  number  of  pupils,  that  the  classes  of  the  pub 
lic  professors  were  completely  deserted.3    The  latter,  in  revenge,  charged 
Libanius  with  being  a  magician,  and  obtained  his  expulsion  from  Con 
stantinople  about  A.D.  346.*    He  then  went  to  Nicomedia,  where  he 
taught  with  equal  success,  but  also  drew  upon  himself  an  equal  degree  of 
malice  from  his  opponents.5    After  a  stay  of  five  years  at  Nicomedia,  he 
was  recalled  to  Constantinople.    Eventually  he  took  up  his  abode  at  An- 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  a  Id.  ib.  3  Lilian.,  De  Fort,  sua,  p.  29. 

* 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  t>43 

tioch,  where  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  life.  Here  he  received  the 
greatest  marks  of  favor  from  the  Emperor  Julian,  A.D.  362.  In  the  reign 
of  Valens  he  was  at  first  persecuted,  but  he  afterward  succeeded  in  win 
ning  the  favor  of  that  monarch  also.  The  Emperor  Theodosius  likewise 
showed  him  marks  of  respect ;  but  his  enjoyment  of  life  was  disturbed 
by  ill  health,  by  misfortunes  in  his  family,  and  more  especially  by  the  dis 
putes  in  which  he  was  incessantly  involved,  partly  with  rival  sophists, 
and  partly  with  the  prefects.  It  can  not,  however,  be  denied  that  he  him 
self  was  as  much  to  blame  as  his  opponents,  for  he  appears  to  have  pro 
voked  them  by  his  querulous  disposition,  and  by  the  pride  and  vanity  which 
every  where  appear  in  his  orations,  and  which  led  him  to  interfere  in  polit 
ical  questions,  which  it  would  have  been  wiser  to  have  left  alone.  He  was 
the  teacher  of  St.  Basil  and  Chrysostom,  with  whom  he  always  kept  up 
a  friendly  connection.  The  year  of  his  death  is  uncertain,  but  from  one 
of  his  epistles  it  is  evident  that  he  was  alive  in  A.D.  391,1  and  it  is  prob 
able  that  he  died  a  few  years  after,  in  the  reign  of  Arcadius. 

We  still  possess  a  considerable  number  of  the  works  of  Libanius,  but 
how  many  may  have  been  lost  is  uncertain.  The  extant  works  are,  1. 
Upoyvfji.vaff/j.dTwv  TrapaSefy/uaTa,  or  Models  for  rhetorical  exercises.  2.  A.6y- 
01,  or  Orations,  sixty-seven  in  number.  3.  MeAeVcu,  or  Declamations, 
that  is,  orations  on  fictitious  subjects,  and  descriptions  of  various  kinds, 
fifty  in  number.  4.  A  Life  of  Demosthenes,  and  arguments  to  the  speeches 
of  the  same  orator.  5.  'ETTJO-TOA.^,  or  Letters,  of  which  a  large  number 
are  still  extant.  Many  of  these  letters  are  extremely  interesting,  being 
addressed  to  the  most  eminent  men  of  his  time,  such  as  the  Emperor 
Julian,  Athanasius,  Basil,  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Chrysostom,  and  others. 
The  style  in  all  of  them  is  neat  and  elegant. 

As  regards  the  style  of  Libanius  as  an  orator,  some  modern  critics 
have  called  him  a  real  model  of  pure  Attic  Greek ;  but  this  is  carrying 
praise  too  far,  and  even  Photius  entertained  a  much  more  correct  opinion 
of  him.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Libanius  is  by  far  the  most  talented 
and  most  successful  among  the  rhetoricians  of  the  fourth  century ;  he 
took  the  best  orators  of  the  classic  age  as  his  models,  and  we  can  often 
see  in  him  the  disciple  and  happy  imitator  of  Demosthenes,  and  his  ani 
mated  descriptions  are  often  full  of  power  and  elegance ;  but  he  is  not 
able  always  to  rise  above  the  spirit  of  his  age,  and  we  rarely  find  in  him 
that  natural  simplicity  which  constitutes  the  great  charm  of  the  best  At 
tic  orators.  His  diction  is  a  curious  mixture  of  the  pure  Old  Attic  with 
what  may  be  termed  the  Modern  ;  and  the  latter  would  be  more  excusa 
ble,  if  he  did  not  so  often  claim  for  himself  the  excellences  of  the  ancient 
orators.  Moreover,  it  is  evident  that,  like  all  other  rhetoricians,  he  is 
more  concerned  about  the  form  than  the  substance.  As  far  as  the  his 
tory  of  his  age  is  concerned,  some  of  his  orations,  and  still  more  his 
epistles,  are  of  great  value,  such  as  the  oration  in  which  he  relates  the 
events  of  his  own  life,  the  eulogies  on  Constantius  and  Constans,  the 
orations  on  Julian,  several  orations  describing  the  condition  of  Antioch, 
and  those  which  he  wrote  against  his  professional  and  political  opponents.3 
i  Epitt.,  941.  3  Smitk,-l.c: 


544  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

A  complete  edition  of  all  the  works  of  Libanius  does  not  yet  exist.  The  best  edition 
of  the  orations  and  declarations  is  that  of  Reiske,  Altenburg,  1791-97,  4  vols.  8vo.  The 
number  of  orations,  however,  in  Reiske's  edition,  amounts  to  only  sixty-five.  Another 
oration,  Hep!  'OAujuTriov,  was  discovered  in  a  Barberini  MS.  by  Siebenkees,  who  pub 
lished  it  in  his  Anecdota  Gr<zca,  Niirnberg,  1798,  p.  75,  seqq.  A  sixty-seventh  oration 
was  first  published  by  Mai,  in  his  second  edition  of  Fronto,  Rome,  1823,  p.  421,  seqq. 
So,  again,  the  number  of  declamations  in  Reiske's  edition  is  forty-eight,  but  two  addi 
tional  ones  have  since  been  published,  one  by  JBoissonade,  in  his  Anecdota  Gr&ca,  vol.  i., 
p.  165,  seqq.  The  best  edition  of  the  Epistles  is  that  of  J.  C.  Wolf,  Amsterdam,  1738,  fol. 


V.  HIMERIUS  ('I/xe/Nos),1  a  celebrated  sophist,  was  born  at  Prusa,  in 
Bithynia,  and  belongs,  according  to  the  most  correct  account,  to  the 
period  from  A.D.  315  to  386.     He  studied  at  Athens,  and  was  subse 
quently  appointed  professor  of  rhetoric  there.     In  this  city  he  gave  in 
struction  to  Julian,  afterward  emperor,  and  the  celebrated  Christian  wri 
ters  Bazil  and  Gregory  of  Nazianzus.     In  A.D.  362  the  Emperor  Julian 
invited  him  to  his  court  at  Antioch,  and  made  him  his  secretary.    He  re 
turned  to  Athens  in  A.D.  368,  and  there  passed  the  remainder  of  his  life. 
According  to  Suidas,  he  died  in  a  fit  of  epilepsy  (ifp&  v6<ros\     Himerius 
was  a  pagan,  and,  like  Libanius  and  other  eminent  men,  remained  a 
pagan,  though  we  do  not  perceive  in  his  writings  any  hatred  or  animosity 
against  the  Christians  ;  he  speaks  of  them  with  mildness  and  moderation, 
and  seems,  on  the  whole,  to  have  been  of  an  amiable  disposition.     He 
was  the  author  of  a  considerable  number  of  works,  a  part  of  which  only 
have  come  down  to  us.     There  were  extant  in  the  time  of  Photius  sev 
enty-one  orations  by  Himerius,  but  of  these  only  twenty-four  have  reach 
ed  our  time  complete.     Of  thirty-six  others  we  have  only  extracts  in 
Photius,  and  of  the  remaining  eleven  we  have  only  fragments.     In  his 
oratory  Himerius  took  Aristides  for  his  model.     His  style,  however,  is 
obscure,  and  overladen  with  ornament,  and  marked  occasionally  by  turgid 
and  bombastic  phraseology.     Still,  he  is  not  without  talent  as  an  orator. 

A  complete  collection  of  all  the  extant  productions  of  Himerius  was  first  prepared  by 
Wernsdorf,  Gottingen,  1790,  8vo.  This  is  the  best  edition.  One  fragment  of  some 
length  has  since  been  discovered,  and  is  given  in  Boissonade's  Anecdota  Graca,  vol.  i., 
p.  172,  seqq. 

VI.  JULIANUS,  FLAVIUS  CLAuoius,3  usually  called  JULIAN,  and  surnamed 
the  APOSTATE,  was  born  at  Constantinople  A.D.  331,  and  reigned  as 
Roman  emperor  A.D.  361-363.    He  wrote  a  large  number  of  works,  many 
of  which  are  extant.     Julian  was  a  man  of  reflection  and  thought,  but 
possessed  no  creative  genius.    He  did  not,  however,  write  merely  for  the 
sake  of  writing,  like  so  many  of  his  contemporaries  ;  his  works  show  that 
ho  had  his  subjects  really  at  heart,  and  that  in  literature  as  well  as  in 
business  his  extraordinary  activity  arose  from  the  wants  of  a  powerful 
mind,  which  desired  to  improve  itself  and  the  world.     His  style  is  re 
markably  pure,  and  is  a  close  imitation  of  that  of  the  best  classical  Greek 
writers,  although  he  sometimes  indulges  in  the  exaggerated  and  over- 
elaborate  diction  of  his  contemporaries.    The  following  are  his  most  im 
portant  works  :  1.  Letters,  most  of  which  were  intended  for  public  circu 
lation,  .and  are  of  great  importance  for  the  history  of  the  time.     One, 

i  Smtik,  Lo.  *  Id.  H>. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  545 

which  was  addressed  to  the  senate  and  people  of  Athens,  and  in  which 
the  author  explains  the  motives  for  his  having  taken  up  arms  against  the 
Emperor  Constantius,  is  an  interesting  and  most  important  historical 
document.  2.  Orations  on  various  subjects,  as,  for  instance,  on  the  Em 
peror  Constantius,  on  the  worship  of  the  sun,  on  the  mother  of  the  gods 
(Cybele),  on  true  and  false  cynicism,  &c.  3.  The  Casars,  or  the  Ban 
quet  (Kaicrapes  %  Su/uiroVioj/),  a  satirical  composition,  which  Gibbon  justly 
calls  one  of  the  most  agreeable  and  instructive  productions  of  ancient  wit. 
Julian  describes  the  Roman  emperors  approaching  one  after  the  other  to 
take  their  seat  around  a  table  in  the  heavens  ;  and  as  they  come  up,  their 
faults,  vices,  and  crimes  are  censured  with  a  sort  of  bitter  mirth  by  old 
Silenus,  whereupon  each  Caesar  defends  himself  as  well  as  he  can.  4. 
MISOPOGON,  or  "the  enemy  of  the  beard"  (Mio-oircayw),  called  also  ANTI- 
OCHICUS,  or  "  the  Antiochian"  ('Aj/TioxtK<k)>  a  severe  satire  on  the  licen 
tious  and  effeminate  manners  of  the  inhabitants  of  Antioch,  who  had  ridi 
culed  Julian  when  he  resided  in  that  city  on  account  of  his  austere  vir 
tues,  and  had  laughed  at  his  allowing  his  beard  to  grow  in  the  ancient 
fashion.  5.  AGAINST  THE  CHRISTIANS  (Kara  Xpitrnavuv}.  This  work  is 
lost,  but  some  extracts  from  it  are  given  in  Cyrill's  reply  to  it,  which  is 
still  extant.1 

The  latest  and  best  edition  of  the  Letters  is  that  of  Heyler,  Mainz,  1828,  8vo.  It  con 
tains  eighty-three  letters,  with  a  Latin  translation,  and  a  commentary  of  the  editor. 
There  are,  besides,  some  fragments  of  lost  letters.  The  best  editions  of  the  C&sars  are 
by  Heusinger,  Gotha,  1736,  8vo,  1741,  8vo,  and  by  Harles,  the  editor  of  Fabricius'  Bib- 
liotheca  Grceca,  Erlangen,  1785,  8vo.  The  best  edition  of  the  collected  works  of  Julian  is 
by  Spanheim,  Leipzig,  1696,  fol. 

VII.  PRO^ERESIUS  (Ilpoai/jcVios),2  a  distinguished  sophist  and  rhetorician, 
was  a  native  of  Armenia,  born  about  A.D.  276.     He  first  studied  at  An 
tioch  under  Ulpian,  and  afterward  at  Athens  under  Julian,  then  seated 
in  the  chair  of  rhetoric.     At  a  later  period  he  became  the  chief  teacher 
of  rhetoric  at  Athens,  and  enjoyed  a  very  high  reputation.    When  Julian 
promulgated  his  ill-judged  decree,  forbidding  teachers  belonging  to  the 
Christian  religion  to  practice  their  art,  we  are  told  that  Proaeresius  was 
expressly  exempted  from  its  operation,  but  that  he  refused  any  immunity 
not  enjoyed  by  his  brethren.     From  the  account  of  Eunapius,  we  learn 
that  he  was  of  gigantic  stature  (Casaubon  and  Wyttenbach  conjecture 
that  he  was  nine  feet  high  I),  and  of  stately  bearing,  so  vigorous  in  his  old 
age  that  it  was  impossible  to  suppose  him  other  than  in  the  prime  of  life. 
His  constitution  was  of  iron  strength  (ff&riptov),  braving  the  winter  colds 
of  Gaul  without  shoes,  and  in  light  clothing,  and  drinking  unwarmed  the 
water  of  the  Rhine  when  almost  frozen.     His  style  of  eloquence  seems 
to  have  been  flowing,  and  graced  with  allusions  to  classic  times.    He  had 
great  powers  of  extemporaneous  speaking,  and  a  prodigious  memory. 
Among  his  pupils  were  Basil  and  Gregory  of  Nazianzus.     We  have  no 
account  of  any  works  of  his. 

VIII.  BASILIUS  (Boun'Aeios),3  commonly  called  Basil  the  Great,  was  born 
A.D.  329,  at  Caesarea,  in  Cappadocia.     He  studied  at  Antioch  or  Con 
stantinople,  under  Libanius,  and  subsequently  continued  his  studies  for 

i  Smith,  I.  c.  a  Id.  ib. '  Id.  it>. 


546  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

four  years  (A.D.  351-355),  chiefly  under  the  sophists  Himerius  and  Proae- 
resius.  Among  his  fellow-students  were  the  Emperor  Julian  and  Gregory 
of  Nazianzus,  the  latter  of  whom  became  his  most  intimate  friend.  After 
acquiring  the  greatest  reputation  as  a  student  for  his  knowledge  of  rhet 
oric,  philosophy,  and  science,  he  returned  to  Caesarea,  where  he  began  to 
plead  causes,  but  soon  abandoned  his  profession,  and  devoted  himself  to 
a  religious  life.  He  now  led  an  ascetic  life  for  many  years.  He  was 
elected  Bishop  of  Caesarea  in  A.D.  370,  in  place  of  Eusebius.  He  died  in 
A.D.  379.  Basil  stands  conspicuous  for  learning  and  eloquence,  for  his 
zeal  for  the  Catholic  faith  against  the  powerful  Arian  and  semi-Arian 
bishops  in  his  neighborhood,  and  for  his  efforts  for  church  union  both  in 
the  East  and  West. 

The  first  complete  edition  of  Basil's  works  was  published  at  Basle  in  1551.  The  most 
complete  and  the  best  edition,  however,  is  that  of  Gamier,  Paris,  1721-30,  3  vols.  fol. ;  re 
printed  in  6  vols.  royal  8vo,  Paris,  1839,  seqq. 


CHAPTER  LV. 

SEVENTH   OR    BYZANTINE    PERIOD— continued. 
WRITERS     OF    WORKS    OF    FICTION. 

J.  FIVE  writers  claim  our  attention  under  this  head,  namely,  HELIODO- 
RUS,  ACHILLES  TATIUS,  LONGUS,  CHARITON,  and  EUSTATHIUS. 

II  HELIODORUS*  was  born  at  Emesa,  in  Syria,  and  flourished  under  the 
Emperor  Theodosius  and  his  sons,  about  the  close  of  the  fourth  century 
of  our  era.  He  was  bishop  of  Tricca,  in  Thessaly ;  but,  before  he  was 
raised  to  this  dignity,  he  wrote  a  romance  in  ten  books,  entitled  Mthiopica, 
(AidioiriKa.),  because  the  scene  at  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  story  is 
laid  in  ^Ethiopia.  It  relates  the  loves  of  Theagenes  and  Chariclea,  and 
is  far  superior  to  the  other  Greek  romances.  Though  very  deficient  in 
those  characteristics  of  modern  fiction  which  appeal  to  the  universal  sym 
pathies  of  our  nature,  the  work  is  extremely  interesting  on  account  of 
the  rapid  succession  of  strange  and  not  altogether  improbable  adventures, 
the  many  and  various  characters  introduced,  and  the  beautiful  scenes 
described.  The  opening  scene  is  admirable,  and  the  point  of  the  story  at 
which  it  occurs  is  very  well  chosen.  The  language  is  simple  and  ele 
gant,  though  it  is  sometimes  too  diffuse,  and  often  deviates  from  the  pure 
Attic  standard.  The  work  formed  the  model  for  subsequent  Greek  ro 
mance  writers. 

In  modern  times  the  Mthiopica  was  scarcely  known  until,  at  the  sacking  of  Ofen  in 
152f>,  a  MS.  of  the  work  in  the  library  of  Matthias  Corvinus,  king  of  Hungary,  attracted, 
by  its  binding,  the  attention  of  a  soldier,  who  brought  it  into  Germany,  and  at  last  it 
came  into  the  hands  of  Obsopaeus,  who  printed  it  at  Basle,  1534,  4to.  Several  better 
MSS.  were  afterward  discovered.  The  best  and  latest  editions  are  that  of  Mitscherlich, 
in  his  Scriptores  Grasci  Erotici,  Strasburg,  1798,  of  which  it  forms  the  second  volume,  in 
two  parts,  and  that  of  Coraes,  Paris,  1803,  2  vols.  8vo. 

III.  ACHILLES  TATIUS  ('AxiAAci/s  Tcrnos),2  or,  as  Suidas  and  Eudocia 
call  him,  ACHILLES  STATIUS,  an  Alexandrine  rhetorician,  lived  in  the  lat- 
i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib* 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  547 

ter  half  of  the  fifth  or  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century  of  our  era.  He 
is  the  author  of  a  Greek  romance,  in  eight  books,  containing  the  adven 
tures  of  two  lovers,  Clitophon  and  Leucippe,  which  has  come  down  to  us. 
It  bears  the  title  Ta  Kara  Aey/aW???/  Kal  KheiroQuvra.  Notwithstanding  all 
its  defects,  it  is  one  of  the  best  love-stories  of  the  Greeks,  ranking  next 
to  the  JEthiopica  of  Heliodorus.  Achilles,  like  his  predecessor  Heliodorus, 
disdained  having  recourse  to  what  is  marvellous  and  improbable  in  itself; 
but  the  accumulation  of  adventures,  and  of  physical,  as  well  as  moral 
difficulties,  which  the  lovers  have  to  overcome  before  they  are  happily 
united,  is  too  great,  and  renders  the  story  improbable,  though  their  ar 
rangement  and  succession  are  skillfully  managed  by  the  author.  The 
style  of  the  work,  on  which  the  author  appears  to  have  bestowed  his 
principal  care,  is  thoroughly  rhetorical  ;  there  is  a  perpetual  striving  after 
elegance  and  beauty,  after  images,  puns,  and  antitheses.  These  things, 
however,  were  just  what  the  age  of  Achilles  required,  and  that  his  novel 
was  much  read  is  attested  by  the  number  of  MSS.  still  extant. 

The  first  edition  of  the  Greek  original  appeared  at  Heidelberg,  1601,  8vo,  printed  to 
gether  with  similar  works  of  Longus  and  Parthenius.  An  edition,  with  a  voluminous, 
though  rather  careless  commentary,  was  published  by  Salmasius,  Leyden,  1640,  8vo. 
The  best  and  most  recent  edition  is  by  Jacobs,  Leipzig,  1821,  2  vols.  8vo. 


IV.  LONGUS  (A^/oy),  a  Greek  sophist,  who  is  believed  to  have  lived  in 
the  fourth  or  at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth  century  of  our  era.     Concerning 
his  history  nothing  is  known,  but  it  is  probable  that  he  lived  after  the 
time  of  Heliodorus,  for  there  are  some  passages  in  his  work  which  seem 
to  be  imitations  of  Heliodorus  of  Emesa.     Longus  is  one  of  the  erotic 
writers  whom  we  meet  with  at  the  close  of  ancient  and  the  beginning 
of  middle-age  history.    His  work  bears  the  title  UoifjifviKtHv  ra>u  Kara  Ad<pviv 
Kal  X\6r)v,  or,  in  Latin,  Pastoralia  de  Daphnide  et  Chloe.     It  is  written  in 
pleasing  and  elegant  prose,  but  is  not  free  from  the  artificial  embellish 
ments  peculiar  to  that  age. 

Among  more  recent  editions  we  may  notice  those  of  Boden,  Leipzig,  1777,  8vo  ;  Villoi- 
son,  Paris,  1778,  2  vols.  8vo  and  4to,  with  a  very  much  improved  text  ;  Mitscherlich, 
Bipont  (Deuxponts),  1794,  8vo,  forming  the  third  volume  of  his  Scriptores  Erotici  Graeci  ; 
Schaefer,  Leipzig,  1803,  8vo  ;  Passow,  Leipzig,  1811,  12mo  ;  and  Seiler,  Leipzig,  1843,  8vo. 

V.  CHARITON  (Xapirw),1  a  native  of  Aphrodisias,  in  Caria,  was  the 
author  of  a  Greek  romance,  in  eight  books,  on  the  loves  of  Chaereas  and 
Callirhoe.    The  title  of  the  work  is  Xapiruvos  'A$po8i(n(as  rwv  -n-epl  Xaipeav 
Kal  Ka\\ipp6T}v  fpotrtKcav  StTjyTj^Twi/  \6yoi  4\,  but  the  name  and  native  place 
of  the  writer  are  probably  feigned  (from  x"-PLS  an(^  'A^poStT?]),  as  his  time 
and  position  certainly  are.    He  represents  himself  as  the  secretary  of  the 
orator  Athenagoras,  evidently  referring  to  the  Syracusan  orator  mention 
ed  by  Thucydides  as  the  political  opponent  of  Hermocrates.     Nothing  is 
known  respecting  the  real  life  or  the  time  of  the  author,  but  he  probably 
did  not  live  earlier  than  the  fifth  century  after  Christ.    The  incidents  are 
natural  and  pleasing,  and  the  style  is  simple  ;  but  the  work,  as  a  whole, 
is  reckoned  inferior  to  those  of  Achilles  Tatius,  Heliodorus,  Longus,  and 
Xenophon  of  Ephesus. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


548  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

There  is  only  one  known  MS.  of  the  work,  from  which  it  was  printed  by  D'Orville, 
Amsterdam,  1750,  3  vola.  4to,  generally  in  orve.  D'Orville's  commentary  is  esteemed  one 
of  the  best  on  any  ancient  author.  It  was  reprinted,  with  additional  notes  by  Beck,  1 
vol.  8vo,  Leipzig,  1783.  A  very  beautiful  edition  of  the  text  was  printed  at  Venice, 
1812,  4to. 

VI.  EUSTATHIUS  (Euo-rciflios),1  an  erotic  writer  or  novelist,  whose  name 
is  written  in  some  MSS.  Eumathius.  With  regard  to  his  native  place,  he 
is  called  in  the  MSS.  of  his  work  Ma/c/je^jSoAiTT/j,  which  is  usually  referred 
to  Constantinople,  or  Hape/j.fto\trr)s,  according  to  which  he  would  be  a 
native  of  the  Egyptian  town  of  Parembole.  He  appears  to  have  been  a 
man  of  rank,  and  high  in  office,  for  the  MSS.  describe  him  as  irpwrovu- 
jSeAeVtjUos,  and  fjifyas  xapTo<j>u\a|,  or  chief  keeper  of  the  archives.  The 
time  at  which  he  lived  is  uncertain,  but  it  is  generally  believed  that  he 
can  not  be  placed  earlier  than  the  twelfth  century  of  our  era,  so  that  his 
work  would  be  the  latest  Greek  novel  that  we  know  of.  Some  writers 
confound  him  with  Eustathius  the  archbishop  of  Thessalonica,  from  whom 
he  must  surely  be  distinguished.  The  novel  which  he  wrote,  and  through 
which  alone  his  name  has  come  down  to  us,  bears  the  title  Tb  Kaff  "tcrp.(vr]v 
Kal  "fa-fj-iviau  dpu(j.a,  and  consists  of  eleven  books,  at  the  end  of  the  last  of 
which  the  author  himself  mentions  the  title.  It  is  a  story  of  the  love  of 
Hysmine  and  Hysminias,  written  in  a  very  artificial  style.  The  tale  is 
monotonous  and  wearisome ;  the  story  is  frigid  and  improbable,  and  shows 
no  power  of  invention  on  the  part  of  the  author. 

This  work  was  first  edited  by  Gaulmin,  Paris,  1617,  8vo.  Somewhat  improved  re 
prints  of  Gaulmin's  edition  appeared  at  Vienna,  1791,  8vo,  and  Leipzig,  1792,  8vo. 


CHAPTER  LVI. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD— continued. 
GRAMMARIANS.2 

I.  CONSTANTINOPLE  became  during  this  period  the  seat  of  grammatical 
erudition.     The  founder  of  this  new  capital  established  in  it  a  school 
which  bore  some  resemblance  to  a  modern  university,  since  instruction, 
in  place  of  being  confined  to  a  single  science,  was  extended  over  all  the 
branches  of  human  knowledge.    He  also  erected  a  building,  which  George 
Codinus  calls  a  Tetradisium*  in  which  resided  fifteen  professors,  all  ec 
clesiastics,  who  were  called  OiKovpeviKoi,  (Ecumenics  or  Universals,  and 
had  over  them  a  chief  who  bore  the  title  of  OtKov/j.fviKbs  StSaor/coAos,  or 
(Ecumenic  instructor,  and  had  charge  of  the  public  library  and  the  ecclesi 
astical  archives.     The  library  was  subsequently  enlarged  by  Julian,  who 
incorporated  with  it  his  own  collection.    Valens  also  attached  to  it  seven 
antiquaries  or  philologists,  charged  with  the  preparation  of  manuscripts. 
This  collection  increased,  in  the  course  of  a  century  and  a  half,  to  one 
hundred  and  twenty  thousand  volumes. 

II.  The  CEcumenic  professors  enjoyed  the  highest  consideration  at 

i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  SchOll,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  vi.,  p.  254. 

3  Georg.  Cod.,  De  Orig.  Constant.,  ed.  Paris,  p.  42. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  549 

Constantinople  ;  the  emperor  often  consulted  them ;  and  their  order  was 
regarded  as  a  kind  of  seminary  which  furnished  archbishops  and  patriarchs 
to  the  Church. 

III.  In  A.D.  476,  under  the  very  short  reign  of  Basilicus  II.,  a  wing 
of  the  Tetradisium  became  a  prey  to  the  flames,  together  with  the  vol 
umes  contained  in  it,  among  which  were,  it  is  said,  the  forty-eight  books 
of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey,  written  in  letters  of  gold  on  the  intestines  of  a 
serpent  one  hundred  and  twenty  feet  long !     Zeno,  the  Isaurian,  and  his 
successors,  repaired  in  part  this  loss ;  but  the  new  collection  had  not 
reached  more  than  thirty-six  thousand  volumes,  when,  in  A.D.  730,  Leo 
III.,  the  celebrated  iconoclast,  if  we  believe  the  common  stery,  gave  or 
ders  to  burn  the  library  of  St.  Sophia,  as  it  was  called,  hoping  thereby  to 
prevent  his  opponents  from  strengthening  their  opinions  by  historical  ar 
guments.     This,  however,  in  all  probability,  is  merely  an  idle  story,  in 
vented  by  some  ignorant  monk,  and  repeated  by  fanatics.     The  library 
would  seem,  however,  to  have  been  actually  destroyed  by  some  confla 
gration,  and  never  to  have  fully  revived.1 

IV.  Grammar,  that  is  to  say,  philology  in  all  its  branches,  was  one  of 
the  sciences  which  the  oecumenic  doctors  professed  ;  but  they  gave  it  a 
new  form.     Being  more  of  theologians  than  grammarians,  and  living  to 
gether  in  a  kind  of  brotherhood,  the  harmony  of  which  would  have  been 
disturbed  had  they  not  closed  the  door  on  all  those  philological  and  crit 
ical  discussions  which  formed  the  delight  of  the  Alexandrean  literati,  and 
often  divided  them  into  parties  and  sects,  the  Byzantine  professors  re 
duced  grammatical  science  to  a  regular  and  unvarying  system.     As  the 
basis  of  their  grammatical  views,  they  adopted  the  theory  of  Dionysius 
Thrax,  or  what  passed  for  such,  and  his  precepts  served  as  a  foundation 
for  all  grammatical  instruction.2 

V.  If  this  system  had  its  advantages,  it  served,  on  the  other  hand,  to 
disgust  all  those  who  were  gifted  with  a  critical  spirit,  and  were  desirous 
of  indulging  in  bolder  speculations.    Hence  the  number  of  Byzantine  gram 
marians,  whose  names  and  works  have  reached  us,  was  very  limited  dur 
ing  the  existence  of  the  Tetradisium.     It  became  somewhat  augmented 
in  the  eighth  century  and  subsequently,  but  among  the  writers  who  thus 
occupied  themselves  with  an  expiring  language,  few  attained  to  any  de 
gree  of  celebrity.     Many  of  their  works  still  remain  in  MS.  in  the  libraries 
of  Europe,  some  of  which  still  possess  a  certain  value  from  the  citations 
which  they  contain  of  productions  that  are  now  lost.     These  are  the 
works  that  modern  scholars  occasionally  put  forth,  along  with  other  un 
published  productions,  under  the  head  of  Anecdota. 

VI.  Among  the  grammarians  to  whom  we  have  just  been  alluding  the 
following  may  be  named  :   HELLADIUS,  GEORGIUS  CHCEROBOSCUS,  THEO- 
DOSIUS  of  Alexandrea,  MICHAEL  SYNCELLUS,  THEOGNOSTUS,  MANUEV  Mos- 
CHOPULUS,  uncle  and  nephew,  MAXIMUS  PLANUDES,  NICEPHORAS  GREGORAS, 
and  TRIG  HA,  who  wrote  on  metres. 

i  SchiM,  I.  c.  2  Id.  ib. 


550  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


CHAPTER  LVII. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE   PERIOD— continued. 
SCHOLIASTS     AND     COMMENTATORS. 

I.  SYRIANUS  (2,vpia.v6s},1  a  Greek  philosopher  of  the  JNTeo-Platonic  school, 
was  a  native  of  Alexandrea.    Of  his  personal  history  little  is  known.    He 
studied  with  great  zeal  under  Plutarchus,  who  appointed  him  his  success 
or.     The  most  distinguished  of  his  own  disciples  was  Proclus,  who  re 
garded  him  with  the  greatest  veneration.    Syrianus  wrote  commentaries 
on  various  parts  of  Aristotle's  writings.     Of  these,  a  commentary  on  the 
Metaphysics  is  still  extant,  which  is  of  considerable  value.    We  have  re 
maining,  also,  a  treatise  on  Ideas,  and  a  commentary  on  the  2T«<r«s  of 
Hermogenes,  published  by  Aldus  in  the  second  volume  of  the  Rhetores, 
1509,  and  by  Walz  in  the  fourth  volume  of  his  rhetorical  collection. 

II.  EUSTATHIUS, a  archbishop  of  Thessalonica,  was  one  of  the  best  schol 
iasts  of  this  period.    He  was  a  native  of  Constantinople,  and  lived  during 
the  latter  half  of  the  twelfth  century.     The  works  of  Eustathius,  which 
have  come  down  to  us,  contain  the  amplest  proofs  that  he  was  beyond 
all  dispute  the  most  learned  man  of  his  age.     His  writings  consist  of  com 
mentaries  on  ancient  Greek  poets,  theological  treatises,  homilies,  epistles, 
&c.,  the  first  of  which  are  to  us  the  most  important.     These  commen 
taries  show  that  Eustathius  possessed  the  most  extensive  knowledge  of 
Greek  literature,  from  the  earliest  to  the  latest  times,  while  his  other 
works  exhibit  his  high  personal  character,  and  his  great  power  as  an  ora 
tor,  which  procured  him  the  esteem  of  the  imperial  family  of  the  Coin- 
neni.    The  most  important  of  all  his  works  is  his  Commentary  on  the  Iliad 
and  Odyssey  (naptK&o\al  els  T^V  'O^pou  'lAtciSa  /col  'OSixra'etcu'),  or,  rather, 
his  collection  of  extracts  from  earlier  commentators  of  those  two  poems. 
This  vast  compilation  was  made,  with  the  most  astonishing  diligence  and 
perseverance,  from  the  numerous  and  extensive  works  of  the  Alexan- 
drean  grammarians  and  critics,  as  well  as  from  later  commentators ;  and 
as  nearly  all  the  works  from  which  Eustathius  made  his  extracts  are  lost, 
his  commentary  is  of  incalculable  value  to  us,  for  he  has  preserved  at 
least  the  substance  of  their  remarks  and  criticisms.     The  work,  indeed, 
is  extremely  deficient  in  plan  and  method  ;  the  author,  however,  can  not 
be  blamed  for  these  deficiencies,  as  his  title  does  not  lead  us  to  expect  a 
regular  commentary  (the  term  irapfK&o\ai,  though  commonly  rendered 
"  commentary,"  denoting  merely  "  a  compilation").    He  incorporates  in  it 
everything  which  serves  to  illustrate  his  author,  whether  it  refers  to  the 
language  or  grammar,  or  to  mythology,  history,  and  geography.     We 
have  also  by  Eustathius  a  Commentary  on  Dionysius  Periegetes,  of  the 
same  kind,  and  of  the  same  diffuseness  as  the  commentary  on  Homer. 
Its  great  value  consists  in  the  numerous  extracts  from  earlier  writers  to 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib. 


BYZANTINE     P  E  R  I  0  D.  551 

illustrate  the  geography  of  Dionysius.  A  commentary  on  Pindar  is  also 
mentioned,  which,  however,  is  lost,  with  the  exception  of  the  introduction. 
The  first  edition  of  the  Commentary  on  Homer  was  published  at  Rome,  1542-1550,  4 
vols.  f'ol.,  of  which  an  accurate  reprint  appeared  at  Basle  in  1559-60.  The  Florence  edi 
tion  by  Politus,  1730,  3  vols.  fol.,  contains  only  the  commentary  to  the  first  five  books 
of  the  Iliad,  with  a  Latin  translation.  A  tolerably  correct  reprint  of  the  Roman  edition 
was  published  at  Leipzig,  1825-28,  7  vols.  4to,  the  seventh  containing  the  Index.  Tho 
Commentary  on  Dionysius  is  given  in  R.  Stephens's  edition  of  Dionysius,  Paris,  1547, 
4to  ;  in  that  of  H.  Stephens,  Paris,  1577,  4to,  and  1697,  8vo  ;  in  Hudson's  Geograph.  Min., 
vol.  iv. ;  and,  lastly,  in  Bernhardy's  edition  of  Dionysius,  Leipzig,  1828,  2  vols.  8vo.  The 
Introduction  to  the  Commentary  on  Pindar  was  first  edited  by  Tafel,  in  his  Eustathii 
Thessalonicensis  Opuscula,  Frankfort,  1832,  4to,  from  which  it  was  printed  separately  by 
Schneidewin,  Gottingen,  1837,  8vo. 

III.  We  have  already  mentioned  John  and  Isaac  TZETZES,  and  the 
commentary  of  the  latter  on  the  Cassandra  of  Lycophron.  It  only  re 
mains  to  notice  under  the  present  head  DEMETRIUS  TiucLiNius.1  This 
individual  lived  about  A.D.  1400.  He  compiled  scholia  on  Hcsiod,  Pindar, 
Sophocles,  and  Aristophanes.  His  treatise  on  the  Metres  of  Sophocles  is  of 
little  value,  and  of  still  less  is  a  treatise  on  Figures.  He  was  the  author, 
also,  of  a  recension  of  the  tragedies  of  Sophocles,  which  formed  the  basis 
of  the  editions  of  this  poet  from  1553  to  the  revolution  effected  by  Brunck. 

The  scholia  of  Triclinius  on  Sophocles,  and  his  treatise  on  the  metres  of  that  poet,  were 
published  for  the  first  time  by  Turnebus,  in  his  edition  of  Sophocles.  Brunck  has  insert 
ed  the  scholia  in  his  edition,  but  not  the  treatise  on  metres,  which  he  regards  as  of  no 
value  whatever. 


CHAPTER  LVIII. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD-continued. 
LEXICOGRAPHERS,    ETC. 

I.  AMONG  the  lexicographers  of  this  period  the  most  deserving  of  no 
tice  are  HARPOCRATION,  AMMONIUS,  HESYCHIUS,  PHILEMON,  PHOTIUS,  ZON- 
ARAS,  and  SUIDAS.     To  these  we  may  add  the  writers  on  dialects,  GREG- 
ORIUS  CORINTHUS,  THOMAS  MAGisxER,  and  GEORGius  LfiCAPENus.     After 
whom  we  will  consider  the  literary  collections  of  PHOTIUS,  already  men 
tioned  as  a  lexicographer,  and  the  Empress  EUDOCIA. 

LEXICOGRAPHERS. 

II.  HARPOCRATION  ('ApTroKpoTiow)  VALERIUS*  was  the  author  of  a  Greek 
lexicon  to  the  works  of  the  ten  Attic  orators,  entitled  Hepl  ruv  Ae£««j/  ruy 
SfKa  f>T)T6pwi>,  and  which  is  still  extant.    It  contains  not  only  explanations 
of  legal  and  political  terms,  but  also  accounts  of  persons  and  things  men 
tioned  in  the  speeches  of  the  Attic  orators.     The  work  is  to  us  of  the 
highest  importance,  as  it  contains  a  vast  deal  of  information  on  the  pub 
lic  and  civil  code  of  Athens,  and  on  antiquarian,  historical,  and  literary 
subjects,  of  which  we  should  be  ignorant  but  for  this  dictionary  of  Har- 
.pocration,  since  most  of  the  works  from  which  the  author,  compiled  are 

1  SchelJ,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  vi.^p.  373* 2  Smith,  Diet.  Eingr.,  s. ','v. 


552 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


lost,  and  appear  to  have  perished  at  an  early  period.  Hence  Suidas,  the 
author  of  the  Etymologicum  Magnum,  and  other  late  grammarians,  de 
rived  their  information  on  many  points  from  Harpocration.  All  we  know 
about  his  personal  history  is  contained  in  a  line  or  two  in  Suidas,  who 
calls  him  a  rhetorician  of  Alexandrea,  and,  besides  the  above-mentioned 
dictionary,  attributes  to  him  an  avO-np£>v  awa-ywyf),  which  is  lost.  The 
period  when  he  flourished  is  uncertain. 

The  Leipzig  edition,  1824,  2  vols.  8vo,  incorporates  every  thing  that  has  been  done  by 
previous  editors  for  Harpocration.  The  most  recent  edition  of  the  text  (together  with 
the  dictionary  of  Moeris)  is  that  of  Bekker,  Berlin,  1833,  8vo. 


III.  AMMONIUS  ('A^wj/tos)  GRAMMATICUS,  professor  of  grammar  at  Alex 
andrea  at  the  close  of  the  fourth  century.     He  was  also  priest  of  the 
Egyptian  Ape.     On  the  vigorous  overthrow  of  idolatry  in  Egypt  by  the 
bishop  Theophilus,  A.D.  388-391,  Arnmonius  fled  to  Constantinople,  and 
there  resumed  his  profession.     He  wrote  a  work  in  Greek  On  the  Differ 
ences  of  Words  of  like  Signification  (irepl  o/uoiW  /col  Sia<f>6p<ay  Ae|eo>j>),  which 
is  appended  to  many  lexicons,  as,  for  instance,  that  of  Scapula.     It  was 
edited  by  Valckenaer,  Leyden,  1739,  4to,  and,  with  farther  notes,  by  C. 
F.  Ammon,  Erlangen,  1787,  8vo  ;  and  by  Schaefer,  Leipzig,  1822,  8vo. 
There  is  another  work  by  Ammonius,  -n-epl  a.Kvpo\oyias,  which  has  not  yet 
been  printed. 

IV.  HESYCHIUS  (  H<ri>xios),1  an  Alexandrean  grammarian,  under  whose 
name  a  large  Greek  dictionary  has  come  down  to  us.     Respecting  his 
personal  history  absolutely  nothing  is  known,  but  he  probably  lived  about 
A.D.  380.     The  work  is  based,  as  the  writer  himself  tells  us,  upon  the 
lexicon  of  Diogenianus,  who  wrote  a  Greek  lexicon  in  the  time  of  Ha 
drian.     The  investigations  of  modern  scholars  have  rendered  it  highly 
probable  that  Hesychius  was  a  pagan.     This  view  seems,  indeed,  to  be 
contradicted  by  the  fact  that  the  work  also  contains  a  number  of  Christian 
glosses  (Ae'|6«,  glossa  sacra),  and  references  to  Christian  writers  ;  but  it 
is  now  a  generally  established  belief  that  these  glosses  and  references 
are  interpolations,  introduced  into  the  work  by  a  later  hand.     The  work 
is  one  of  very  great  importance,  not  only  on  account  of  its  explaining  the 
words  of  the  Greek  language,  but  also  from  its  comprising  much  literary 
and  archaeological  information,  derived  from  earlier  grammarians  and 
commentators,  whose  works  are  lost.     It  contains,  also,  a  large  number 
of  peculiar  dialectical  and  local  forms  and  expressions,  and  many  quota 
tions  from  other  writers.     The  arrangement  of  the  work,  however,  is 
very  defective.     The  author  would  seem  to  have  been  more  concerned 
about  the  accumulation  of  matter  derived  from  the  most  heterogeneous 
sources,  than  about  a  skillful  and  systematic  arrangement  ;  but  some  of 
these  defects  are  perhaps  not  to  be  put  to  the  account  of  the  original 
compiler,  but  to  that  of  the  later  interpolators. 

The  first  edition  is  that  of  Venice,  1514,  fol.,  edited  by  the  learned  Greek  Musurus,  who 
made  many  arbitrary  alterations  and  additions,  as  is  clear  from  the  Venetian  MS.  (the 
only  one  as  yet  known).  The  edition  of  Musurus  was  followed  by  those  of  Florence, 
1520,  fol.  ;  Hagenau,  1521,  fol.  ;  and  that  of  C.  Schrevelius,  Leyden  and  Amsterdam, 
1666,  4to.  The  best  critical  edition,  however,  with  a  comprehensive  commentary,  is 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  553 

that  of  J.  Albert!,  which  was  completed  after  Alberti's  death  by  Ruhnken,  Leyden,  1746- 
1766,  2  vols.  fol.  A  supplement  to  this  edition  was  published  by  Schow,  Leyden,  1792, 
8vo.  The  Glossce  Sacra  have  been  edited  separately,  with  emendations  and  notes,  by 
Ernesti,  Leipzig,  1785.  The  Adversaria  Hesychiana  of  Bishop  Pearson,  containing  much 
valuable  matter,  appeared  from  the  Clarendon  press,  Oxford,  1844,  2  vols.  8vo. 

V.  PHILEMON  ($i\T)/j.<av),  the  author  of  a  Ae£iKbv  Texj/oAo7</coV,  the  extant 
portion  of  which  was  first  edited,  from  a  MS.  preserved  in  the  Royal  Li 
brary  at  Paris,  by  C.  Burney,  London,  1812,  and  afterward  by  Osann, 
Berlin,  1821.     The  author  informs  us,  in  his  preface,  that  his  work  was 
intended  to  take  the  place  of  a  similar  lexicon  by  the  grammarian  Hy- 
perechius,  for  such  is  the  true  reading,  and  not  Hypereschius,  as  it  stands 
in  the  text  of  Philemon.     The  work  of  Hyperechius  was  arranged  in 
eight  books,  according  to  the  eight  different  parts  of  speech.    Philemon's 
lexicon  was  a  meagre  epitome  of  this  work,  the  best  parts  of  which  he 
seems  to  have  omitted.     It  is,  however,  not  without  its  value  in  the  de 
partment  of  literary  history.    It  is  often  quoted  in  the  Etymologicum  Mag 
num.     The  part  of  it  which  is  extant  consists  of  the  first  book,  and  the 
beginning  of  the  second,  irept  ovo^aTuv,     Hyperechius  lived  about  the 
middle  of  the  fifth  century  of  our  era,  and  Philemon  may  probably  be 
placed  about  the  seventh. 

VI.  PHOTIUS  (beanos),1  patriarch  of  Constantinople  in  the  ninth  century 
of  our  era,  played  a  distinguished  part  in  the  political  and  religious  his 
tory  of  his  age.     After  holding  various  high  offices  at  the  Byzantine 
court,  he  was,  although  previously  a  layman,  elected  patriarch  of  Con 
stantinople  in  A.D.  858,  in  place  of  Ignatius,  who  had  been  deposed  by 
Bardas,  who  was  all-powerful  at  the  court  of  his  nephew,  Michael  III., 
then  a  minor.     The  patriarchate  of  Photius  was  a  stormy  one,  and  full 
of  vicissitudes.     The  cause  of  Ignatius  was  espoused  by  the  Romish 
Church,  and  Photius  thus  became  one  of  the  great  promoters  of  the 
schism  between  the  Eastern  and  Western  churches.     In  A.D.  867,  Pho 
tius  was  himself  deposed  by  the  Emperor  Basil  I.,  and  Ignatius  was  re 
stored  ;  but  on  the  death  of  Ignatius  in  877,  Photius,  who  had  meanwhile 
gained  the  favor  of  Basil,  was  again  elevated  to  the  patriarchate.     On 
the  death  of  Basil  in  886,  Photius  was  accused  of  a  conspiracy  against 
the  life  of  the  new  emperor,  Leo  VI.,  and  was  banished  to  a  monastery 
in  Armenia,  where  he  seems  to  have  remained  until  his  death.     Photius 
was  one  of  the  most  learned  men  of  his  time,  and,  in  the  midst  of  a  busy 
life,  found  time  for  the  composition  of  numerous  works,  several  of  which 
have  come  down  to  us.     His  Myriobiblon  will  be  more  appropriately  con 
sidered  at  the  close  of  the  present  chapter,  together  with  some  other  of 
his  works ;  his  Lexicon  alone  will  here  be  noticed.     It  is  entitled  Ae'|ewj/ 
ffwayaryf).     Of  this  lexicon  there  exist  several  MSS.,  but  that  known  as 
the  Codex  Galeanus,  because  given  by  Thomas  Gale  to  the  library  of  Trin 
ity  College,  Cambridge,  is  considered  to  be  the  archetype  from  which 
the  others  have  been  transcribed.     This  MS.,  however,  is  itself  very  im 
perfect,  containing,  in  fact,  not  more  than  half  the  original  work.    Nearly 
the  whole  of  the  lexicon  known  as  the  Lexicon  Sangermanense,  a  portion 
of  which  was  published  in  the  Anecdota  Graca,  of  Bekker  (vol.  i.,  p.  319, 

»  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 

A  A 


554  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

seqq.},  appears  to  have  been  incorporated  in  the  lexicon  of  Photius,  of 
which,  when  entire,  it  is  estimated  to  have  formed  a  third  part. 

The  lexicon  of  Photius  was  first  published,  from  Continental  MSS.,  by  Hermann,  Leip 
zig,  4to,  1808.  It  formed  the  third  volume  of  a  set,  of  which  the  first  and  second  volumes 
contained  the  lexicon  ascribed  to  Zonaras.  The  edition  of  Hermann,  however,  having 
failed  to  satisfy  the  wants  of  the  learned,  an  edition  from  a  transcript  of  the  Codex 
Galeanus,  made  by  Person,  was  published  after  the  death  of  that  eminent  scholar,  Lon 
don,  1822,  4to  and  8vo. 

VII.  ZONARAS  JOANNES  ('ludvvrjs  6  Zwmpas),  a  celebrated  Byzantine  his 
torian  and  theologian,  lived  in  the  twelfth  century,  under  the  emperors 
Alexis  I.  Comnenus  and  Calo-Joannes.     Besides  his  theological  works, 
and  his  Annales  (Xpovuttv),  in  eighteen  books,  we  have  a  lexicon  entitled 
Swcryory);  Ae'lecoy  ffvAXeye'ia'a  e/c  §ia.<p6pu>v  $ifi\iwv,  K.  T.  A.     It  was  published 
for  the  first  time  by  Tittmann,  Leipzig,  1808,  2  vols.  4to. 

VIII.  SUIDAS  (Soi/iSas),1  a  Greek  lexicographer,  of  whom  nothing  is 
known.     No  certain  conclusions  as  to  the  age  of  the  compiler  can  be  de 
rived  from  any  passages  in  the  wrork,  since  it  may  have  received  numer 
ous  interpolations  and  additions.    Eustathius,  who  lived  during  the  latter 
half  of  the  twelfth  century  of  our  era,  quotes  the  lexicon  of  Suidas  ;  and 
there  are  passages  in  the  work  referring  to  Michael  Psellus,  who  lived  at 
the  close  of  the  eleventh  century.     The  lexicon  of  Suidas  is  a  dictionary 
of  words,  arranged  in  alphabetical  order,  with  some  few  peculiarities  of 
arrangement ;  but  it  contains  both  words  which  are  found  in  dictionaries 
of  languages,  and  also  names  of  persons  and  places,  with  extracts  from 
ancient  Greek  writers,  grammarians,  scholiasts,  and  lexicographers,  and 
some  extracts  from  later  Greek  authors.    The  names  of  persons  compre 
hend  both  persons  who  are  mentioned  in  sacred  and  profane  history, 
which  shows  that  if  the  work  is  by  one  hand,  it  is  by  a  Christian ;  but 
there  is  no  inconsistency  in  supposing  that  the  original  of  the  lexicon, 
which  now  goes  under  the  name  of  Suidas,  is  a  work  of  earlier  date  even 
than  the  time  of  Stephanus  of  Byzantium,  and  that  it  received  large  ac 
cessions  from  various  hands.    No  well-conceived  plan  has  been  the  basis 
of  this  work ;  it  is  incomplete  as  to  the  number  of  articles,  and  exceed 
ingly  irregular  and  unequal  in  the  execution.     Some  articles  are  pretty 
complete,  others  contain  no  information  at  all.     As  to  the  biographical 
notices,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  Suidas,  or  the  compiler,  got  them 
all  from  one  source,  which,  it  is  farther  supposed,  may  be  the  Onomato- 
logos  or  Pinax  of  Hesychius  of  Miletus,  who  flourished  about  A.D.  540. 
The  work  of  Suidas,  though  without  merit  as  to  its  execution,  is  valuable 
both  for  the  literary  history  of  antiquity,  for  the  explanation  of  words,  and 
for  the  citations  from  many  ancient  writers  ;  and  a  prodigious  amount  of 
critical  labor  has  been  bestowed  upon  it.     Many  emendations  have  been 
made  on  the  text  by  Toup  and  others. 

The  first  edition  of  Suidas  was  by  Demetrius  Chalcondylas,  Milan,  1499,  fol.,  without 
a  Latin  version.  The  second,  by  the  elder  Aldus,  Venice,  1514,  fol.,  is  also  without  a 
Latin  version:  this  edition  was  reprinted  by  Froben,  Basle,  1544,  fol.,  with  some  cor 
rections.  The  first  Latin  translation  of  Suidas  was  made  by  Hieron.  Wolf,  Basle,  1564, 
1581,  fol.  The  first  edition  which  contained  both  the  Greek  text  and  a  Latin  version 
was  by  jEmilius  Portus,  Geneva,  1619,  2  vols.  fol.,  and  1630,  with  a  new  title.  The 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  555 

Latin  version  is  said  to  be  better  than  Wolf's.  The  edition  of  Kiister  appeared  at  Cam 
bridge,  1705,  3  vols.  folio.  The  basis  of  this  edition  is  not  the  editio  princeps,  but  that 
of  Portus.  Kiister  corrected  the  text  with  the  aid  of  the  MSS.,  added  numerous  good 
notes,  and  improved  the  version  of  Portus.  But  he  dealt  with  the  Greek  text  rather  in  an 
arbitrary  way,  and  rejected  all  that  he  considered  to  be  interpolated.  The  edition  of 
Suidas  by  Gaisford,  in  three  handsome  volumes,  folio,  appeared  at  Oxford  in  1834.  The 
first  two  volumes  contain  the  text,  without  a  Latin  version,  and  the  notes,  which  are 
chiefly  selected  from  Kiister  and  others.  The  third  volume  contains  Index  Kusterianus 
Rerum  et  Nominum  Propriorum  qua  extra  seriem  suam  in  Suidas  Lexico  occurrunt ;  Index 
Glossarum  Personarum  Verborumque  notatu  digniorum;  and  Index  Scriptorum  a  Suida 
citatorum.  In  his  preface  Gaisford  states  that  he  used  nearly  the  same  MSS.  as  Kiister, 
but  that  Kiister  was  careless  in  noting  the  readings  of  the  MSS.  Gaisford  has  given 
the  various  readings  of  the  best  MSS.,  and  those  of  the  edition  of  Chalcondylas.  The 
edition  of  Bernhardy,  Halle,  1834-50,  4to  (not  yet  complete),  contains  a  Latin  version, 
and  notes.  It  is  founded  on  the  edition  of  Gaisford. 


WRITERS     ON     DIALECT. 

IX.  GREGORIUS  (or  GEORGIUS)  CORINTHUS,*  more  correctly  GREGORIUS  (or 
GEORGIUS)  PARDUS,  was  archbishop  of  Corinth,  whence  the  name  given  him 
in  some  MSS.  of  Corinthus,  which  last  was  long  supposed  to  have  been  his 
true  name.    The  time  when  he  lived  is  uncertain,  though  he  would  seem 
to  have  been  later  than  the  reign  of  Alexis  I.  Comnenus  (A.D.  1081-1118). 
His  only  published  work  is  Uepl  8ia\fKT<av  (De  Dialectis],  frequently  print 
ed  as  an  appendix  to  the  earlier  Greek  lexicons,  or  in  the  collections  of 
grammatical  treatises.    All  these  earlier  editions  were  made  from  two  or 
three  MSS.,  and  were  very  defective.    But  in  the  last  century,  Gisbertus 
Koenius,  Greek  professor  at  Franeker,  by  the  collation  of  fresh  MSS., 
published  the  work  in  a  more  complete  form,  with  a  preface  and  notes, 
Leyden,  1766,  8vo.     An  edition  by  G.  H.  Schaefer,  containing  all  the 
matter  in  Koenius's  edition,  together  with  other  that  was  new,  appeared 
at  Leipzig  in  1811.     In  this  edition  is  a  Commentatio  Palaographica  by 
Bast. 

X.  THOMAS  MAGISTER,*  a  rhetorician  and  grammarian,  nourished  about 
A.D.  1310.     He  appears  to  have  been  a  native  of  Thessalonica,  to  have 
lived  at  the  court  of  Andronicus  Palaeologus  I.,  and  to  have  held  the  of 
fices  of  marshal  (Magister  Officiorum)  and  keeper  of  the  archives  ( Char- 
tophylax) ;  but  he  afterward  retired  to  a  monastery,  where  he  assumed 
the  name  of  Theodiilus,  and  devoted  himself  to  the  study  of  the  ancient 
Greek  authors.    His  chief  work  was  a  Lexicon  of  Attic  Words  (Kara.  a\<f>d- 
p-nrov  ovofidrtav  'ArTi/cap  itcXoyai),  compiled  from  the  works  of  the  elder 
grammarians,  but  with  very  little  judgment.    The  work  has  some  value, 
on  account  of  its  containing  much  from  the  elder  grammarians  which 
would  otherwise  have  been  lost.     But  when  he  deserts  his  guides,  he 
often  falls  into  the  most  serious  errors.    He  wrote  also  scholia  on  Pindar, 
Euripides,  and  Aristophanes,  the  remains  of  which  are  merged  in  the 
collections  of  ancient  scholia,  and  also  lives  of  those  authors,  which  are 
prefixed  to  some  of  the  editions  of  their  works.    His  other  writings  con 
sist  of  letters  and  orations. 

An  excellent  edition  of  the  Attic  Lexicon,  with  notes  by  Heinsius,  Wolf,  and  many 
1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib. 


556  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

other  scholars,  was  published  by  Bernard,  Leyden,  1757,  8vo.  The  work  has  been  re 
cently  edited  by  Ritschl,  with  valuable  Prolegomena,  Halle,  1832,  8vo.  An  edition  of 
the  Orations  and  Epistles  was  published  at  Upsala,  1693, 4to,  by  Laurentius  Norrmann. 
Two  additional  orations  were  published  in  the  Nova  Collectio  Veterum  Scriptorum  of  Mai, 
vol.  iii.,  p.  145,  seqq. ;  p.  173,  seqq.,  1827,  4to. 

XL  GEORGIUS  LECAPENUS,  a  monk  of  Thessaly,  lived  about  the  middle 
of  the  fourteenth  century,  and  wrote,  among  other  things,  a  lexicon  of 
Attic  words,  in  alphabetical  order,  extracts  from  which  have  been  given 
by  Villoison,  Anecdota  Graca,  vol.  ii.,  p.  79,  and  by  Matthaei,  Lect.  Mosq., 
vol.  i.,  p.  55. 

AUTHORS  OF  BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  AND  OTHER  COLLECTIONS. 

XII.  PnoTius,1  of  whose  life  we  have  already  given  a  sketch,  compiled, 
among  other  works,  a  Mvpi6ftift\ov  %  Bt0Aio07j/oj  (MyriobiUum  sen  Bibliothe- 
ca).  This  is  the  most  important  and  valuable  of  his  works.  It  may  be  de 
scribed  as  an  extensive  review  of  ancient  Greek  literature,  by  a  scholar 
of  immense  erudition  and  sound  judgment.  It  is  an  extraordinary  monu 
ment  of  literary  energy,  for  it  was  written  while  the  author  was  engaged 
in  his  embassy  to  Assyria,  at  the  request  of  his  brother  Tarasius,  who 
was  much  grieved  at  the  separation,  and  desired  an  account  of  the  books 
which  Photius  had  read  in  his  absence.  It  thus  conveys  a  pleasing  im 
pression,  not  only  of  the  literary  acquirements  and  extraordinary  indus 
try,  but  of  the  fraternal  affection  of  the  WTiter.  It  opens  with  a  prefatory 
address  to  Tarasius,  recapitulating  the  circumstances  under  which  it  was 
composed,  and  stating  that  it  contained  a  notice  of  two  hundred  and  sev 
enty-nine  volumes.  The  extant  copies  contain  a  notice  of  two  hundred 
and  eighty  :  the  discrepancy,  which  is  of  little  moment,  may  have  origina 
ted  either  in  the  mistake  of  Photius  himself,  or  in  some  alteration  of  the 
divisions  by  some  transcriber.  The  two  hundred  and  eighty  divisions  of 
the  Bibliotheca  must  be  understood  to  express  the  number  of  volumes 
(codices)  or  manuscripts,  and  not  of  writers  or  of  works.  The  works  of 
some  writers,  as,  for  instance,  of  Philo  Judaeus  (Cod.  103-105),  occupy 
several  divisions  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  one  division  (for  instance,  Cod. 
125,  Justini  Martyris  Scripta  Varid)  sometimes  comprehends  a  notice  of 
several  different  works  written  in  one  codex.  The  writers  examined  are 
of  all  classes :  the  greater  number,  however,  are  theologians,  writers  of 
ecclesiastical  history,  and  of  the  biography  of  eminent  churchmen ;  but 
several  are  secular  historians,  philosophers,  and  orators,  heathen  or  Chris 
tian,  of  remote  or  recent  times,  lexicographers,  and  medical  writers  ;  only 
one  or  two  are  poets,  and  those  on  religious  subjects,  and  there  are  also 
one  or  two  writers  of  romances  or  love-tales.  There  is  no  formal  classi 
fication  of  these  various  writers,  though  a  series  of  writers  or  writings  of 
the  same  class  frequently  occurs.  In  fact,  the  works  appear  to  be  ar 
ranged  in  the  order  in  which  they  were  read.  The  notices  of  the  writers 
vary  much  in  length :  those  in  the  earlier  part  are  very  briefly  noticed, 
the  later  ones  more  fully.  Several  valuable  works,  now  lost,  are  known 
to  us  chiefly  by  the  analyses  or  extracts  which  Photius  has  given  of  them. 
i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  *.  t>. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  557 

The  first  edition  of  the  Bibliotheca  was  put  forth  by  Hoeschelius,  Augsburg,  1601,  fol- 
Sorae  of  the  Epistles  were  subjoined.  There  was  no  Latin  version.  A  Latin  version, 
and  scholia,  by  Schottus  of  Antwerp,  were  published  in  1606,  Augsburg,  fol. ;  but  the 
version  is  inaccurate,  and  has  been  severely  criticised.  It  was,  however,  reprinted  with 
the  Greek  text  at  Geneva,  1612,  fol.,  and  Rouen,  1653,  fol.  This  last  edition  is  a  very 
splendid  one,  but  inconvenient  from  its  size.  An  edition  with  a  revised  text,  formed 
on  a  collation  of  four  MSS.,  was  published  by  Bekker,  Berlin,  1824-25,  2  vols.  thin  4to. 
It  is  convenient  from  its  size,  and  the  copiousness  of  its  index,  but  has  neither  version 
nor  notes. 

XIII.  EuDociA,1  wife  of  the  emperors  Constantine  XI.  (Ducas)  and  Ro- 
manus  IV.  (Diogenes),  compiled  a  dictionary  of  history  and  mythology, 
which  she  called  'luvid,  i.  e.,  Collection  or  Bed  of  Violets.  It  is  prefaced  by 
an  address  to  her  husband  Romanus  Diogenes,  in  which  she  describes  the 
work  as  "a  collection  of  genealogies  of  gods,  heroes,  and  heroines,  of 
their  metamorphoses,  and  of  the  fables  and  stories  respecting  them  found 
in  the  ancients;  containing,  also,  notices  of  various  philosophers."  The 
sources  from  which  the  work  was  compiled  are,  in  a  great  degree,  the 
same  as  those  used  in  the  lexicon  of  Suidas.  This  work  was  printed  for 
the  first  time  by  Villoison,  in  his  Anecdota  Graca,  vol.  i.,  p.  1,  seqq.,  Ven 
ice,  1781. 


CHAPTER  LIX. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD— continued. 
HISTORIANS. 

I.  BEFORE  treating  of  the  historians,  properly  so  called,  who  belong  to 
the  present  period,  we  must  make  mention  of  a  writer  that  has  rendered 
the  greatest  service  to  a  branch  of  knowledge  called,  with  reason,  one 
of  the  eyes  of  history ;  for  without  this  guide  history  runs  the  risk  of 
losing  herself  amid  the  chaos  of  events  that  crowd  around  her.     The 
science  to  which  we  refer  is  Ohronology,  and  the  writer  is  Eusebius. 

II.  EUSEBIUS  (Ewrc'jSios),8  of  Csesarea,  took  the  surname  of  PAMPHILI,  to 
commemorate  his  devoted  friendship  for  Pamphilus,  bishop  of  Caesarea. 
He  was  born  in  Palestine  about  A.D.  264,  toward  the  end  of  the  reign  of 
the  Emperor  Gallienus.     He  was  made  Bishop  of  Caesarea  in  A.D.  315, 
and  died  about  340.     Eusebius  was  a  man  of  great  learning.     The  work 
which  will  here  claim  our  attention  is  the  Chronicon  (Xpovma  iraj/ToSoTrfjs 
/o-Toptas),  a  work  of  great  value  to  us  in  the  study  of  ancient  history.     It 
is  in  two  books.     The  first,  entitled  Xpovoypcupia,  contains  a  sketch  of  the 
history  of  several  ancient  nations,  as  the  Chaldaeans,  Assyrians,  Medes, 
Persians,  Lydians,  Hebrews,  and  Egyptians.    It  is  chiefly  taken  from  the 
riei/TcijSijSAo/'  xpovo^oj'Kfo  of  Africanus,  and  gives  lists  of  kings  and  other 
magistrates,  with  short  accounts  of  remarkable  events  from  the  creation 
to  the  time  of  Eusebius.     The  second  book  consists  of  synchronological 
tables,  with  similar  catalogues  of  rulers  and  striking  occurrences,  from 
the  time  of  Abraham  to  the  celebration  of  Constantine's  Viccnnalia  at  Nic- 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  j^.  #. 


558  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

omedia,  A.D.  327,  and  at  Rome,  A.D.  328.  Eusebius's  object  in  writing 
it  was  to  give  an  account  of  ancient  history  previous  to  the  time  of  Christ, 
in  order  to  establish  belief  in  the  truth  of  the  Old  Testament  history,  and 
to  point  out  the  superior  antiquity  of  the  Mosaic  to  any  other  writings. 
In  the  course  of  the  work  Eusebius  gives  extracts  from  Berosus,  San- 
choniathon,  Polyhistor,  Cephalion,  and  Manetho,  which  materially  in 
crease  its  value.  Some  of  the  other  works  of  Eusebius,  although  not 
falling  within  our  limits,  may  briefly  be  noticed  here.  These  are,  1.  The 
Praparatio  Evangelica  (  EuayyeA-i/cTjs  airoSei^ews  irpoTrapaffKevi] ),  in  fifteen 
books,  a  collection  of  various  facts  and  quotations  from  old  writers,  by 
which  it  was  supposed  that  the  mind  would  be  prepared  to  receive  the 
evidences  of  Christianity.  2.  The  Demonstratio  Evangelica  (EvayyeXiK^j 
O7r^86i|js),  in  twenty  books,  of  which  ten  are  extant,  a  collection  of  evi 
dences,  chiefly  from  the  Old  Testament,  addressed  principally  to  the 
Jews.  3.  The  Ecclesiastical  History  ('EKKXycnao-TiK))  'Icrop/a),  in  ten  books, 
containing  the  history  of  Christianity  from  the  birth  of  Christ  to  the  death 
of  Licinius,  A.D.  324. 

The  Greek  text  of  the  Chronicon  is  lost,  with  the  exception  of  some  fragments  preserved 
by  George  Syncellus  in  his  Chronicle,  and  by  Eusebius  himself  in  his  Prasparatio  Evan 
gelica.  There  is  extant,  however,  part  of  a  Latin  translation  of  it  by  Jerome,  published 
by  Scaliger,  Leyden,  1606,  of  which  another  and  enlarged  edition  appeared  at  Amsterdam, 
1658.  Subsequently,  in  1792,  an  Armenian  of  Constantinople,  named  Georgius  Johannis, 
discovered  an  Armenian  translation  of  the  entire  work.  He  made  a  copy  of  this,  and 
transmitted  it,  in  1794,  to  Dr.  Zohrab,  at  Venice.  Of  this  Armenian  version  Zohrab  and 
Mai  published  a  Latin  translation  at  Milan,  1818,  together  with  the  Greek  fragments. 
In  the  same  year  Aucher  published  at  Venice  the  Chronicon  in  Armenian,  Greek  (as  far 
as  extant),  and  Latin.  The  best  edition  of  the  Praeparatio  Evangelica  is  by  Heinichen, 
Leipzig,  1842,  2  vols.  8vo,  and  of  the  Ecclesiastical  History,  by  the  same,  Leipzig,  1827, 
3  vols.  8vo. 

III.  The  first  historian,  properly  so  called,  during  the  period  we  are  at 
present  considering,  was  PRAXAGORAS,  a  native  of  Athens,  who  lived  after 
the  time  of  Constantine  the  Great,  probably  under  his  sons.     He  wrote, 
at  the  age  of  nineteen,  two  books  on  the  Athenian  kings ;  at  the  age  of 
twenty-two,  two  books  on  the  history  of  Constantine  ;  and  at  the  age  of 
thirty-one,  six  books  on  the  history  of  Alexander  the  Great.     All  these 
works  were  written  in  the  Ionic  dialect.    None  of  them  have  come  down 
to  us,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  extracts  made  by  Photius  from  the 
history  of  Constantine.     In  this  work  Praxagoras,  though  a  heathen, 
placed  Constantine  before  all  other  emperors. 

IV.  Next  in  order  is  EUNAPIUS,  a  sophist  and  historian,  bom  at  Sardis 
in  A.D.  347,  and  who  seems  to  have  lived  till  the  reign  of  the  Emperor 
Theodosius  the  younger.    He  wrote,  1.  Lives  of  Sophists,  still  extant,  con 
taining  twenty-three  biographies  of  sophists,  most  of  whom  were  con 
temporaries  of  Eunapius,  or  had  lived  shortly  before  him.    Though  these 
biographies  are  exceedingly  brief,  and  the  style  is  intolerably  inflated,  yet 
they  supply  us  with  important  information  respecting  a  period  in  the  his 
tory  of  philosophy,  which,  without  this  work,  would  be  buried  in  utter  ob 
scurity.     2.  A  continuation  of  the  History  of  Dexippus,  in  fourteen  books. 
It  began  with  A.D.  270,  and  went  down  to  404.     Of  this  work  we  have 
only  extracts. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  559 

The  latest  and  best  edition  of  the  Lives  of  the  Sophists,  which  gives  a  much  improred 
text,  with  a  commentary  and  notes  by  Wyttenbach,  is  that  of  Boissonade,  Amsterdam, 
1822,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  fragments  of  the  History  are  best  given  in  the  Corpus  Script. 
Hist.  Byzant.  of  Bekker  and  Niebuhr,  and  in  Muller's  Fragm.  Hist.  Graze.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  7, 
seqq,,  forming  part  of  Didot's  Bibliotheca  Grasca,  Paris,  1851. 

V.  OLYMPionoRus,1  an  historical  writer,  a  native  of  Thebes,  in  Egypt, 
lived  in  the  fifth  century  after  Christ.     He  wrote  a  work  in  twenty-two 
books,  entitled  'la-ropiKol  \6yoi,  which  comprised  the  history  of  the  West 
ern  Empire  under  the  reign  of  Honorius,  from  A.D.  407  to  October,  A.D. 
425.     Olympiodorus  took  up  the  history  from  about  the  point  at  which 
Eunapius  had  ended.     The  original  work  is  lost,  but  an  abridgment  of  it 
has  been  preserved  by  Photius,  who  describes  the  style  of  the  work  as 
being  clear,  but  without  force  or  vigor,  loose,  and  descending  to  vulgarity, 
so  as  not  to  merit  being  called  a  history.    Of  this  Photius  thinks  that  the 
author  himself  was  aware,  and  that  for  this  reason  he  spoke  of  his  work 
as  not  being  a  history,  but  a  collection  of  materials  for  a  history  (U'ATJ  <rvy- 
ypa<pris).     It  was  dedicated  to  the  Emperor  Theodosius  II.     It  appears, 
from  what  Photius  has  preserved  of  his  writings,  that  Olympiodorus  was 
a  heathen. 

The  abridgment  of  Photius  has  been  several  times  published.  It  is  best  given,  how 
ever,  in  the  Collection  of  the  Byzantine  Historians,  by  Bekker  and  Niebuhr,  Bonn,  1829, 
and  in  Miiller's  Fragm.  Hist.  Grcec.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  57,  seqq.,  forming  part  of  Didot's  Biblio 
theca  Gr&ca,  Paris,  1851. 

VI.  ZOSIMUS  (Zca<Ti/j.os)2  lived  in  the  time  of  the  younger  Theodosius. 
He  wrote  a  history  of  the  Roman  Empire,  in  six  books,  wrhich  is  still  ex 
tant.     This  work  must  have  been  written  after  A.D.  425,  as  an  event  is 
mentioned  in  it  which  took  place  in  that  year.    The  first  book  comprises 
a  sketch  of  the  history  of  the  early  emperors,  down  to  the  end  of  the 
reign  of  Dioclesian,  A.D.  305.     The  second,  third,  and  fourth  books  are 
devoted  to  the  history  of  the  fourth  century,  which  is  treated  much  less 
concisely.     The  fifth  and  sixth  books  embrace  the  period  from  A.D.  395 
to  410,  when  Attalus  was  deposed.     The  work  of  Zosimus  is  mainly, 
though  not  altogether,  an  abridgment  or  compilation  of  the  works  of  pre 
vious  historians.     His  style  is  concise,  clear,  pure,  and  not  unpleasing. 
His  chief  fault,  as  an  historical  writer,  is  his  neglect  of  chronology.    Zosi 
mus  was  a  pagan,  and  comments  severely  upon  the  faults  and  crimes  of 
the  Christian  emperors.     Hence  his  credibility  has  been  assailed  by  sev 
eral  Christian  writers.     There  are,  no  doubt,  numerous  errors  of  judg 
ment  to  be  found  in  the  work,  and  sometimes  (especially  in  the  case  of 
Constantine)  an  intemperate  expression  of  opinion,  which  somewhat  ex 
aggerates,  if  it  does  not  distort,  the  truth  ;  but  he  does  not  seem  fairly 
chargeable  with  deliberate  invention  or  willful  misrepresentation. 

The  best  editions  of  Zosimus  are  by  Reitemeier,  Leipzig,  1784,  8vo,  and  by  Bekker, 
Bonn,  1837,  forming  part  of  the  Collection  of  Byzantine  Historians. 

BYZANTINE     HISTORIANS.3 

VII.  This  is  the  name  given  to  a  series  of  Greek  historians  and  writers, 
who  lived  under  the  Eastern  or  Byzantine  emperors  between  the  sixth 
i  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.v.          ,  2  Id.  ib.  3  Penny  Cyclopaedia,  vol.  vi ,  p.  81,  seqq. 


560  G  R  E  E  K     LITERATURE. 

and  the  fifteenth  centuries.  They  may  be  divided  into  two  classes  :  1. 
The  historians  properly  so  called,  whose  collected  works  constitute  a 
complete  history  of  the  Byzantine  empire  from  the  time  of  Constantino 
the  Great  to  the  taking  of  Constantinople  by  the  Turks ;  and,  2.  The  gen 
eral  chroniclers,  who  have  attempted  to  give  a  chronography  of  the  world 
from  the  earliest  times. 

VIII.  The  historians  are  as  follows : 

1.  JOANNES  ZONARAS,  of  Constantinople,  first  an  officer  of  the  imperial 
court,  and  afterward  a  monk  of  Mount  Athos,  lived  in  the  twelfth  century, 
under  the  Emperors  Alexis  I.  Comnenus  and  Calo-Joannes.  We  have 
already  mentioned  him  under  the  lexicographers  of  this  period.  He  wrote 
a  Chronicon  (XpoviK6v),  or  "Annals  of  the  World,"  in  eighteen  books.  In 
the  first  part  of  his  work  he  belongs  to  the  class  of  general  chroniclers  or 
compilers  ;  but  from  the  time  of  Constantine  he  treats  more  particularly 
of  the  history  of  the  Eastern  empire,  which  he  brings  down  to  the  death 
of  Alexis  I.  Comnenus,  in  1118.  In  the  latter  part  of  his  work,  Zonaras 
wrote  as  an  eye-witness  of  the  events  he  describes,  but  writh  a  brevity 
which  is  surprising,  considering  the  many  interesting  and  important  oc 
currences  of  his  time.  His  deficiencies,  however,  in  this  respect,  are  am 
ply  supplied  by  Anna  Comnena,  the  daughter  of  the  Emperor  Alexis.  2. 
NICETAS  ACOMINATUS  (NiKTjTcts  'AKo^ij/ciTos),  also  called  CHONIATES,  because 
he  was  a  native  of  Chonae,  formerly  Colossse,  in  Phrygia,  one  of  the  most 
important  Byzantine  historians,  \vas  born  about  the  middle  of  the  twelfth 
century,  and  filled  several  high  offices  at  the  court  of  Isaac  Angelus  (A.D. 
1185-1195).  He  died  at  Nicaea  in  1216.  His  "  History"  of  the  Byzan 
tine  emperors,  in  twenty-one  books,  begins  with  1118  and  ends  with  1206. 
3.  NICEPHORUS  GREGORAS  (Niw^^pos  6  Tp-^yopas),  of  Heraclea  Pontica,  en 
joyed  the  favor  of  Andronicus  Palaeologus  the  elder ;  but,  owing  to  the 
controversy  between  the  Palamites  and  Acindynites,  he  was  confined  in 
a  convent  by  the  Patriarch  in  1351.  He  was  afterward  released,  and  died 
in  1359.  He  wrote  a  Byzantine,  or,  as  he  styles  it,  a  "  Roman"  history,  in 
thirty-eight  books,  of  which  the  first  twenty-four  only  have  been  printed, 
containing  the  history  of  the  Byzantine  empire  from  1204  to  1331.-  The 
fourteen  remaining  in  MS.  bring  the  history  down  to  1359.  4.  LAON!- 
cus,  or  NICOLAUS,  CHALCONDYLES  (Aa6viKos,  or  Ni«<$Aaos,  XaA/coj>8i/A7?s),  of 
Athens,  a  Byzantine  historian  of  the  fifteenth  century,  wrote  a  "History 
of  the  Turks,  and  of  the  Downfall  of  the  Greek  Empire,"  in  ten  books,  to 
the  year  1462.  An  anonymous  writer  has  continued  the  history  of  the 
Turks  down  to  1565. 

IX.  The  four  writers  mentioned  in  the  preceding  paragraph  form  by 
themselves  an  entire  history  of  the  Byzantine  empire,  from  the  time  of 
Constantine  to  the  Turkish  conquest.     The  following  writers  have  treat 
ed  of  detached  periods  of  the  same  history,  or  have  written  the  lives  of 
particular  emperors.1    5.  PROCOPIUS  (UpoK^inos),  of  Caesarea,  in  Palestine, 
the  most  celebrated  of  the  Byzantine  writers,  was  born  at  the  beginning 
of  the  sixth  century  of  our  era,  and  wrote  the  "  History  of  his  own  Time," 
in  eight  books,  to  the  year  545.     He  also  wrote  a  "  Secret  History"  (Anec- 

1  Penny  Cyclopaedia,  I.  c. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  561 

dota)  of  the  reign  of  Justinian  down  to  the  year  553,  which,  as  to  the 
manner  in  which  he  speaks  of  that  emperor  and  his  court,  contrasts  sin 
gularly  with  the  panegyrical  tone  of  his  former  work.  6.  AGATHIAS  ('A.ya- 
6ias),  of  Myrina,  in  .Eolis,  a  poet  as  well  as  historian  of  the  sixth  century, 
well  known  for  his  Anthology  (of  which  we  have  made  mention  in  an  early 
part  of  the  present  volume),  studied  first  at  Alexandrea,  whence  he  re 
moved  to  Constantinople  in  554,  being  then  about  eighteen  years  of  age, 
and  applied  himself  to  the  study  of  the  law,  in  which  he  became  eminent. 
He  was  surnamed  Scholasticus,  a  word  which  then  meant  an  advocate. 
He  wrote  a  history,  in  five  books,  of  the  years  553-59  of  Justinian's  reign, 
forming  a  sequel  to  Procopius.  He  died  about  582.  Agathias  is  one  of 
the  most  trustworthy  Byzantine  historians  ;  inferior  to  Procopius  in  talent 
and  information,  but  superior  to  him  in  honesty.  T,he  impartial  manner 
in  which  he  speaks  of  the  various  parties  and  sects,  and  particularly  of 
the  two  great  religious  systems  which  divided  the  world  in  his  time,  has 
made  it  a  matter  of  dispute  whether  he  was  a  Christian  or  a  pagan.  His 
account  of  the  Persians,  and  their  celebrated  King  Chosroes,  or  Nushir- 
van,  is  much  valued  for  its  accuracy  and  fairness.  7.  MENANDER  (MeVcw- 
Spos),  of  Constantinople,  surnamed  PROTECTOR  (UporfKrup,  i.  e.,  body-guard), 
continued  the  history  of  Agathias  to  the  year  582.  Menander's  history  is 
lost,  but  fragments  of  it  are  found  in  the  works  of  Constantine  Porphy- 
rogenitus,  which  relate  to  the  history  of  the  Huns,  the  Avari,  and  other 
Northern  and  Eastern  races,  and  also  to  the  negotiations  and  missions  be 
tween  Justinian  and  Chosroes.  8.  JOANNES,  of  Epiphanea,  in  Syria,  flour 
ished  toward  the  close  of  the  sixth  century.  He  wrote  a  history  of  the 
Persian  war  under  the  Emperor  Maurice,  which  has  never  been  printed, 
and  the  only  MS.  of  it  known  is  in  the  Heidelberg  library.  9.  THEOPHY- 
LACTUS  SIMOCATTA,  an  Egyptian  by  descent,  but  a  Locrian  by  birth,  lived 
in  the  first  part  of  the  seventh  century,  and  wrote  a  history,  in  eight  books, 
from  A.D.  582  until  the  death  of  Maurice  in  602.  10.  JOANNES,  a  monk 
of  Jerusalem,  in  the  eighth  century,  wrote  a  brief  history  of  the  Icono 
clasts,  and  probably  an  anonymous  work  against  Constantine  IV.  11. 
THEODOSIUS,  a  monk  of  Syracuse,  in  the  ninth  century,  has  left  a  narra 
tive  of  the  taking  of  Syracuse  by  the  Spanish  Arabs. 

12.  CONSTANTINUS  VI.,  surnamed  PORPHYROGENITUS,  wrote  the  life  of 
his  grandfather,  Basilius  the  Macedonian,  from  867  to  886.  He  also  wrote 
several  other  works,  which  may  serve  as  illustrations  of  the  Byzantine 
history,  such  as  De  Administrando  Imperio,  on  the  administration  of  the 
the  state,  addressed  to  his  son  Romanus ;  De  Caremoniis  Aulce  Byzantina ; 
De  Them.atibu.sy  on  the  military  divisions  of  the  empire.  He  also  caused 
several  learned  men  to  compile  a  kind  of  historical  library  out  of  the 
works  of  all  previous  historians.  This  great  compilation  was  divided  into 
fifty-three  books,  of  which  the  titles  of  twenty-six  only  are  known.  One 
was  on  the  succession  of  kings,  another  on  the  art  of  generalship,  &c. 
Under  each  of  these  heads,  passages  from  the  various  historians  bearing 
upon  the  subject  were  collected.  Three  books  alone,  more  or  less  muti 
lated,  have  come  down  toous.  One,  entitled  De  Legationibus,  is  an  ac 
count  of  the  various  embassies  between  the  Romans  and  other  nations ; 


562  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

another,  De  Sententiis;  and  the  third,  De  Virlute  et  Witto.  13.  GENESIUS, 
who  lived  in  the  middle  of  the  tenth  century,  wrote  a  history,  in  four 
books,  containing  the  reigns  of  Leo  V.,  the  Armenian ;  Michael  II.,  the 
Stammerer;  Theophilus ;  Michael  III.;  and  Basil  I.,  the  Macedonian, 
who  died  in  886.  The  work  of  Genesius  is  short,  and  altogether  a  poor 
compilation ;  but  as  it  contains  the  events  of  a  period  of  Byzantine  his 
tory  of  which  we  have  but  scanty  information,  it  is,  nevertheless,  of  im 
portance.  14.  LEONTIUS,  of  Byzantium,  called  the  younger,  wrote  also  a 
history  of  the  same  period,  to  serve  as  an  introduction  to  Constantine's 
Life  of  Basilius.  15.  An  anonymous  writer  has  left  a  continuation  of 
Constantine's  Life  of  Basilius,  embracing  the  lives  of  Leo  VI.  and  his 
brother  Alexander,  of  Constantine  VI.  himself,  and  his  son  Romanus. 
16.  JOANNES  CAMENIATA,  of  Thessalonica,  wrote  an  account  of  the  taking 
of  that  city  by  the  Saracens  in  904,  of  which  he  was  an  eye-witness.1 

17.  LEO  DIACONUS,  of  Kaloe,  a  town  of  Asia,  near  the  sources  of  the 
Cayster,  born  about  950,  accompanied  Basilius  II.  in  his  wars  against  the 
Bulgarians,  and  wrote  the  lives  of  Romanus,  Nicephorus  Phocas,  and 
Tzimisces,  from  959  to  975.  18.  MICHAEL  CONSTANTINE  PSELLUS  wrote 
a  history  from  the  death  of  Tzimisces,  in  975,  till  the  accession  of  Con 
stantine  Ducas  in  1059.  It  has  not  yet  been  published.  19.  NICEPHORUS 
BRYENNIUS,  the  husband  of  Anna  Comnena,  wrote  "  Historical  Materials," 
being  a  kind  of  memoirs  of  the  Comneni  family,  to  the  accession  of  Alexis 
I.  20.  ANNA  COMNENA  has  written  the  history  of  her  father  Alexis.  21. 
JOANNES  CINNAMUS,  who  lived  toward  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century,  was 
imperial  notary  at  Constantinople.  He  wrote  the  lives  of  John  Comne- 
nus  and  of  Manuel  his  son,  from  1118,  where  Anna  Comnena  ends,  till 
1176.  Like  his  predecessors,  he  is  partial  against  the  Latins  or  Franks, 
and  especially  unjust  toward  Roger  I.  of  Sicily,  who  was  a  great  man  for 
his  time,  though  an  enemy  of  the  Byzantines.  22.  GEORGIUS  ACROPOLI- 
TA,  born  in  1220,  at  Constantinople,  filled  several  important  offices  under 
Michael  Palseologus,  and  died  in  1282.  There  are  two  works  under  his 
name,  one  styled  a  "  Chronography,"  and  the  other  a  "  Short  Chronicle  of 
the  late  Events,"  both  referring  to  the  period  from  1204,  when  the  Franks 
took  Constantinople,  to  1261,  when  they  were  finally  expelled.  Acropoli- 
ta  has  also  written  a  general  chronicle,  from  the  creation  to  the  taking 
of  Constantinople  by  the  Franks,  which  is  not  yet  printed.  23.  GEORGIUS 
PACHYMERES  (Tedpyios  6  Tlaxv^pr^s},  one  of  the  most  important  of  the  By 
zantine  writers,  was  born  at  Nicaea  in  1242.  After  the  recovery  of  Con 
stantinople  by  the  Greeks,  he  was  raised  to  high  offices  in  the  state.  He 
wrote  a  "  Byzantine  History,"  which  forms  a  continuation  to  Acropolita's 
work,  and  comes  down  to  1308.  Pachymeres  is  a  faithful  but  dull  writer. 
He  wrote,  also,  several  philosophical  works,  and  a  history  of  his  own  life.2 

24.  JOANNES  CANTACUZENUS,  after  his  abdication  of  the  empire  in  1355, 
retired  to  a  convent,  where  he  wrote  a  Byzantine  history  from  1320  to 
1357.  Cantacuzenus  is,  in  general,  a  good  authority  for  the  history  of 
that  period,  in  which  he  acted  an  important  part,  though  he  is,  of  course, 
somewhat  partial  in  his  own  cause.  25.  JOANNES  DUCAS,  of  the  imperial 
1  Penny  Cyclopaedia,  I.  c.  3  Ibid. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  563 

family  of  that  name,  fled  from  Constantinople  at  the  time  of  the  Turkish 
invasion,  and  took  refuge  at  Lesbos  under  the  Genoese  adventurer,  Prince 
Castelluzzi.  He  wrote  a  Byzantine  history,  which  begins  from  Adam, 
after  the  fashion  of  the  Chroniclers,  and  is  but  a  brief  general  chronicle 
as  far  as  the  year  1341,  after  which  his  account  becomes  more  circum 
stantial,  being  more  especially  occupied  with  the  history  of  the  latter  pe 
riod  of  the  eastern  empire.  It  ends  with  the  taking  of  Lesbos  by  the 
Turks  in  1462.  This  latter  part,  therefore,  forms  a  continuation  to  Can  - 
tacuzenus.  26.  JOANNES  ANAGNOSTES,  of  Thessalonica,  has  left  an  ac 
count  of  the  taking  of  that  city  by  the  Turks  in  1430.  27.  JOANNES 
CANANUS  has  written  a  history  of  the  war  against  Sultan  Murad  II.  in 
1420.  28.  GEORGIUS  PHRANZA,  born  in  1401,  of  a  family  related  to  the 
Palaeologi,  filled  some  of  the  highest  offices  in  the  state  under  the  last 
emperors.  He  was  made  prisoner  by  the  Turks  at  the  taking  of  Con 
stantinople,  was  sold  as  a  slave,  recovered  his  freedom,  and  took  refuge 
with  Thomas  Palaeologus,  prince  of  Peloponnesus.  When  the  Turks  in 
vaded  that  part  of  Greece,  Phranza  escaped  to  Italy,  and  at  last  became 
a  monk,  at  Corfu,  in  1468.  There  he  wrote  his  "  Chronicle,"  in  four 
books,  which  begins  with  1260  and  ends  with  1477,  embracing  the  whole 
history  of  the  Palaeologi.  The  work  of  Phranza  is  most  valuable,  though 
it  is  full  of  digressions  upon  religious  controversies,  the  origin  of  com 
ets,  &C.1 

X.  The  following  are  the  general  chroniclers,  properly  so  called,  who  are 
also  included  under  the  general  appellation  of  Byzantine  historians :  1. 
GEORGIUS  SYNCELLUS,  who  lived  in  the  eighth  century,  wrote  a  "  Chro- 
nography,"  from  the  beginning  of  the  world  to  the  time  of  Dioclesian,  in 
which  he  has  availed  himself  of  Eusebius  and  Africanus.  2.  THEOPHANES 
ISAACIUS,  of  Constantinople,  who  died  about  817,  continued  the  Chronicle 
of  Syncellus  from  280  till  813.  3.  JOANNES  of  Antioch,  called  MALALAS, 
a  Syrian  word,  meaning  a  rhetor  or  sophist,  lived  in  the  ninth  century, 
and  wrote  a  Chronicle  from  Adam  till  566.  4.  JOANNES  SCYLITZES,  who 
,  lived  in  the  eleventh  century,  wrote  a  "  Short  History,"  or  Chronicle,  from 
811  until  1057,  which  he  afterward  recast  and  continued  until  1081.  5. 
LEO  GRAMMATICUS  wrote  a  "  Chronography,"  which  is  a  continuation  of 
Theophanes  from  813  to  949.  6.  GEORGIUS  MONACHUS  also  left  a  Chroni 
cle,  embracing  the  same  period  as  Leo's.  7.  The  CHRONICON  PASCHALE, 
called  also  Alexandrean  Chronicle,  is  attributed  by  some  to  Georgius,  the 
bishop  of  Alexandrea,  who  lived  in  the  seventh  century.  It  is  also  called 
Fasti  Siculi,  because  the  MS.  was  discovered  in  Sicily.  It  extends  from 
the  beginning  of  the  world  to  1042.  8.  GEORGIUS  HAMARTOLUS,  an  Archi 
mandrite,  wrote  a  Chronicle  to  the  year  842,  which  is  yet  unedited.  9. 
JOANNES  of  Sicily  wrote,  in  the  ninth  century,  a  Chronicle  from  the  crea 
tion  of  the  world  till  866,  which  is  not  yet  printed.  An  anonymous  con 
tinuation  of  it  till  1222  exists  in  the  imperial  library  at  Vienna.  10.  Ni- 
CEPHORUS,  patriarch  of  Constantinople  in  the  first  part  of  the  ninth  cen 
tury,  has  left  a  Breviarium  Chronographicum,  or  short  Chronicle,  from  the 
creation  to  the  author's  death  in  828,  giving  series  of  the  kings,  emper- 
1  Penny  Cyclopedia,  I.  c. 


564  GREEK     LITERATURE, 

ors,  patriarchs,  bishops,  &c.     He  wrote  also  a  Breviarium  Historicum,  01 
general  history  of  events  from  602  to  770. * 

11.  JULIUS  POLLUX,  not  the  author  of  the  Onomasticon,  wrote  a  Chroni 
cle  with  the  title  of  Historia  Physica,  from  the  creation  to  the  reign  of 
Valens.  A  MS.  in  the  National  Library  at  Paris  brings  it  down  to  the 
death  of  Romanus  the  younger  in  963.  This  Chronicle  is  chiefly  engrossed 
with  church  matters.  12.  GEORGIUS  CEDRENUS,  a  monk  of  the  eleventh 
century,  wrote  a  Chronicle,  compiled  chiefly  from  the  former  chronicles 
of  Scylitzes  and  others.  It  is  mixed  up  with  fictions,  and  is  one  of  the 
least  valuable  in  the  Byzantine  collection.  13.  SIMEON  METAPHRASTES 
filled  some  high  stations  at  the  imperial  court  in  the  first  part  of  the  tenth 
century.  His  Chronicle  comes  down  to  963,  and  has  the  merit  of  being 
compiled  from  the  works  of  ten  lost  writers,  who  lived  between  Leo 
Grammaticus  and  Michael  Psellus.  14.  HIPPOLYTUS,  of  Thebes,  lived  to 
ward  the  end  of  the  tenth  and  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  centuries. 
He  wrote  a  Chronicle  from  the  birth  of  our  Savior  to  his  own  time.  15. 
MICHAEL  GLYKAS,  whose  country  and  age  are  not  ascertained,  wrote  a 
Chronicle  from  the  creation  to  the  year  1118.  It  is  valuable  both  for  its 
historical  and  its  biblical  references.  16.  CONSTANTINE  MANASSES,  who 
lived  in  the  twelfth  century,  has  left  a  Chronicle  in  verse  down  to  1081. 

17.  EPHR.EMIUS,  believed  to  be  the  son  of  John  XII.,  patriarch  of  Con 
stantinople,  wrote  a  Chronicle,  in  iambics,  of  the  emperors,  from  Julius 
Caesar  to  the  restoration  of  the  Byzantine  empire  after  the  Prankish  in 
vasion.    It  is  followed  by  a  chronology  of  the  patriarchs  of  Constantinople 
till  1313.     The  whole  poem  contains  ten  thousand  four  hundred  and  ten 
lines.     Mai  published  it  first  in  his  Vatican  collection  of  unedited  MSS. 

18.  JOEL  wrote  a  short  general  Chronicle  of  the  world  to  the  Frankish 
invasion  of  Constantinople  in  1204.     19.  THEODOSIUS,  of  Melite,  has  left 
a  Chronicle,  which  is  not  yet  printed.     Professor  Tafel,  of  Tubingen,  has 
published  a  notice  of  this  writer  (Tiibingen,  1828),  from  the  MS.  of  his 
Chronicle  at  Tubingen,  and  wrhich  was  brought  from  Constantinople  by 
Gerlach  in  1578.     20.  HESYCHIUS,  of  Miletus,  who  lived  under  Justinus' 
and  Justinian,  wrote  a  history  of  the  world,  which  is  lost,  except  a  valu 
able  fragment  on  the  origin  of  Constantinople,  which  has  been  extracted 
and  preserved  by  Codinus.2 

XI.  Besides  the  above  historians  and  chroniclers,  there  are  other  By 
zantine  authors  who  have  written  on  the  statistics,  politics,  antiquities, 
&c.,  of  the  Roman  empire,  whose  history,  properly  so  called,  they  serve 
to  illustrate,  and  who  are  generally  included  in  the  collection  of  Byzan 
tine  historical  writers.  Among  these  PROCOPIUS  stands  foremost  by  his 
curious  work,  De  JEdificiis  Domini  Justiniani  (Kria-yLiaTa),  in  six  books, 
which  contains  a  brief  notice  of  the  towns,  temples,  convents,  bridges, 
roads,  walls,  and  fortifications  built  or  repaired  under  the  reign  of  Jus 
tinian.  2.  JOANNES  LAURENTIUS,  called  LYDUS,  from  his  being  a  native 
of  Philadelphia,  in  Lydia,  lived  under  Justinian,  and  was  both  a  poet  and 
prose  writer.  He  has  left  a  work  "  On  the  Roman  Magistrates,"  which 
affords  valuable  assistance  for  the  knowledge  of  Roman  civil  history. 
1  Penny  Cijcteftedia,  1.  c.  a  Ibid. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  565 

The  MS.  was  first  discovered  by  Choiseul  Gouffier  and  Villoison  in  the 
library  of  Prince  Morousi,  at  Constantinople,  in  1781,  and  is  now  in  the 
public  library  at  Paris.  In  the  same  MS.  was  found  another  work  of  Ly- 
dus,  riepl  Stocr-niJifiwi',  or  De  Ostentis,  on  divination  or  augury.  He  wrote 
also  Hepl  (JLWWV  <rvyYpa<f>-f),  De  Mensibus  Liber,  of  which  there  are  two  epi 
tomes  or  summaries  and  a  fragment  extant.  3.  HIEROCLES,  called  the 
Grammarian,  to  distinguish  him  from  the  philosopher  of  the  same  name, 
wrote  a  Synecdemos,  or  traveller's  guide,  in  which  he  describes  the  sixty- 
four  provinces  of  the  Eastern  Empire,  and  the  nine  hundred  and  thirty- 
five  cities  or  towns  contained  in  it.  He  appears  certainly  to  have  lived 
previous  to  the  tenth  century.  4.  THEOPHYLACTUS,  archbishop  of  Achris, 
in  Bulgaria,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eleventh  century,  wrote  a  work  "  On 
the  Education  of  Princes,"  intended  for  the  younger  Constantine,  the  son 
of  Michael  VII.  Parapinaces.  5.  ALEXIS  I.  COMNENUS  wrote  Novum  Ra- 
tionarium,  or  inventory  of  the  revenues  of  the  state,  in  imitation  of  Au 
gustus.  6.  A  monk  of  unknown  name,  who  lived  under  Alexis  I.,  wrote 
a  book  on  the  Antiquities  of  Constantinople,  which  gives  a  description  of 
its  buildings,  monuments,  &c.  7.  MATTH^EUS  BLASTARES,  a  monk,  wrote, 
about  1305,  an  account  of  the  numerous  household  charges  and  offices  in 
the  imperial  palace  of  Constantinople.  8.  GEORGIUS  CODINUS,  surnamed 
Curopaldtes,  lived  in  the  latter  age  of  the  empire,  and  wrote  "  On  the  Dig 
nities  and  Offices  of  the  Church  and  Court  of  Constantinople."  9.  The 
Emperor  MANUEL  PAL^EOLOGUS  wrote  a  book  "  on  the  Education  of 
Princes."  He  also  wrote  "  a  Dialogue  with  a  Turk,  held  at  Ancyra,  in 
Galatia,"  where  Manuel  was  once  stationed  in  winter  quarters  with  his 
auxiliary  corps,  serving  under  Sultan  Bajazet.  This  work,  which  is  yet 
unpublished,  is  said  to  give  an  interesting  view  of  the  tottering  condition 
of  the  once  mighty  empire  toward  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century. 
There  are  also  sixty-six  unpublished  letters  of  Manuel  in  the  public  li 
brary  at  Paris,  which  contain  interesting  allusions  to  the  history  of  that 
period.' 

Most  of  the  Byzantine  historians,  chroniclers,  and  other  writers,  were  collected  and 
published  in  the  great  edition  made  by  order  and  at  the  expense  of  Louis  XIV.,  in  36  vols. 
fol.,  Paris,  1645-1711 .  The  Jesuits  Labbe  and  Maltrait,  Petau  and  Poussines  ;  the  Do 
minicans  Goar  and  Comb6fis,  Professor  Fabrot,  Charles  du  Fresne  Seigneur  du  Gauge  ; 
Allacci,  the  librarian  of  the  Vatican  ;  Banduri,  librarian  at  Florence  ;  Boivin,  the  king's 
librarian  at  Paris  ;  and  Bouilliaud,  a  mathematician,  were  each  intrusted  with  parts  of 
this  splendid  work.  The  Greek  text  is  accompanied  with  a  Latin  translation  and  notes. 
The  last  volume  contains  the  Arabian  Chronicle  of  Abu  Ben  Raheb,  which  serves  to  illus 
trate  Byzantine  history.  Another  edition  was  published  at  Venice,  in  23  vols.  fol.,  1729, 
and  the  following  years,  which  contains  several  works  omitted  in  the  Paris  edition,  such 
as  Phranza,  Genesius,  and  Malalas.  Others  were  published  separately  afterward  as  a 
supplement  to  the  Venice  edition  :  "  Opera  Georgii  Pisidae,  Theodosii  Diaconi  et  Corippi 
Africani,"  Rome,  1777,  fol. ;  "  Julii  Pollucis  Historia  Sacra,"  Bologna,  1779,  fol. ;  "  Con- 
stantini  Porphyrogeniti  libri  ii.  De  Cseremoniis  Aulse  Byzantinae,"  2  vols.  fol.,  Leipzig, 
1751 ;  "  Leonis  Diaconi  Caloensis  Historia,"  ed.  Hase,  Paris,  1819,  fol.  A  new  edition 
of  the  Byzantine  historians  was  projected  by  the  late  B.  G.  Niebuhr,  the  first  volume  of 
which  appeared  at  Bonn,  1828,  8vo.  Since  Niebuhr's  death  it  has  been  carried  on  by 
Bekker,  Dindorf,  and  other  philologists,  some  of  whom  were  associated  with  Niebuhr  in 
the  outset.  It  has  already  reached  nearly  fifty  volumes,  and  will  be,  when  completed, 

1  Penny  Cydop&dia,  L  c. 


566 


GREEK     LITERATURE. 


the  best  and  most  complete  edition.  The  title  is  as  follows  :  Corpus  Scriptorum  Historic 
ByzantinaR.  Editio  cmendatior  et  copiosior,  consilio  B.  G.  Niebuhrii  C.  F.  institute,,  auc- 
toritate  Academue  Litter  arum  Regias  Borussicas  continuala^  Bonn,  1828,  &c. 


CHAPTER  LX. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  fERlOD-contmued. 
GEOGRAPHERS. 

I.  MARCIANUS  (MapKiav6s},1  of  Heraclea  Pontica,  a  Greek  geographer, 
lived  after  Ptolemy,  whom  he  frequently  quotes,  and  before  Stephanus  of 
Byzantium,  who  refers  to  him,  but  his  exact  date  is  uncertain.     If  he  is 
the  same  Marcianus  as  the  one  mentioned  by  Synesius  (Ep.  103)  and 
Socrates  (H.  E.,  iv.,  9),  he  must  have  lived  at  the  beginning  of  the  fifth 
century  of  the  Christian  era.     He  wrote  a  work  in  prose,  entitled  "  A 
Periplus  of  the  External  Sea,  both  Eastern  and  Western,  and  of  the 
largest  Islands  in  it"  (Tlepi-rrXovs  TTJS  e|w  &a\d(T(n)s,  etpov  re  /cat  effirfpiov, 
nal  *-<av  fv  avrr)  peyiffTuv  vfawv).     The  term  "  External  Sea"  he  used  in 
opposition  to  the  "  Mediterranean,"  which,  he  says,  had  been  sufficiently 
described  by  Artemidorus.     This  work  was  in  two  books,  of  which  the 
former,  on  the  Eastern  and  Southern  seas,  has  come  to  us  entire ;  but  of 
the  latter,  which  treated  of  the  Western  and  Northern  seas,  we  possess 
only  the  last  three  chapters  on  Africa,  and  a  mutilated  one  on  the  dis 
tance  from  Rome  to  the  principal  cities  of  the  world.     In  this  work  he 
chiefly  follows  Ptolemy,  and  in  the  calculation  of  the  stadia  he  adopts  the 
reckoning  of  Protagoras.     He  also  made  an  epitome  of  the  eleven  books 
of  the  periplus  of  Artemidorus  of  Ephesus,  but  of  this  epitome  we  have 
only  the  introduction,  and  the  periplus  of  Pontus,  Bithynia,  and  Paphla- 
gonia.     It  was  not,  however,  simply  an  abridgment  of  Artemidorus,  for 
Marcianus  tells  us  that  he  made  use  of  the  works  of  other  geographers 
who  had  written  descriptions  of  coasts.     Marcianus  also  published  an 
edition  of  Menippus  of  Pergamum,  a  geographer  who  lived  in  the  time  of 
Augustus.     Some  fragments  of  this  are  preserved. 

The  works  of  Marcianus  are  edited  by  Hudson,  in  the  Geographi  Greed  Minores,  vol. 
i. ;  by  Miller,  in  his  "  Supplement  aux  dernieres  editions  des  Petits  G4ograph.es,"  Paris, 
1839,  8vo  ;  and  separately  by  Hoffmann,  Marciani  Periplus,  &c.,  Leipzig,  1841,  8vo. 

II.  STEPHANus,2  of  Byzantium,  called  also  STEPHANOS  BYZANTINUS,  was 
the  author  of  a  geographical  lexicon,  entitled  Ethnica  ('E0j/t/ca),  of  which, 
unfortunately,  we  possess  only  an  epitome.     There  are  few  ancient  writ 
ers  of  any  importance  of  whom  we  know  so  little  as  of  Stephanus.     All 
that  can  be  affirmed  of  him  with  certainty  is,  that  he  was  a  grammarian 
of  Constantinople,  and  lived  after  the  time  of  Arcadius  and  Honorius,  and 
before  that  of  Justinian  II.     His  work  was  reduced  to  an  epitome  by  a 
certain  Hermolaus,  who  dedicated  his  abridgment  to  Justinian  II.     Ac 
cording  to  the  title,  the  chief  object  of  the  work  was  to  specify  the  gen 
tile  names  derived  from  the  several  names  of  places  and  countries  in  the 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  567 

ancient  world.  But,  while  this  is  done  in  every  article,  the  amount  of  in 
formation  given  went  far  beyond  this.  Nearly  every  article  in  the  epi 
tome  contains  a  reference  to  some  ancient  writer  as  an  authority  for  the 
name  of  the  place  ;  but  in  the  original,  as  we  see  from  the  extant  frag 
ments,  there  were  considerable  quotations  from  the  ancient  authors,  be 
sides  a  number  of  very  interesting  particulars,  topographical,  historical, 
mythological,  and  others.  Thus  the  work  was  not  merely  what  it  pro 
fessed  to  be,  a  lexicon  of  a  special  branch  of  technical  grammar,  but  a 
valuable  dictionary  of  geography.  How  great  would  have  been  its  value 
to  us,  if  it  had  come  down  to  us  unmutilated,  may  be  seen  by  any  one 
who  compares  the  extant  fragments  of  the  original  with  the  correspond 
ing  articles  in  the  epitome.  These  fragments,  however,  are,  unfortunate 
ly,  very  scanty. 

The  best  editions  of  Stephanus  are  that  of  Berkelius,  Leyden,  1688,  fol.,  reprinted  1694, 
fol. ;  that  of  Dindorf,  Leipzig,  1825,  &c.,  4  vols.  8vo  ;  that  of  Westermann,  Leipzig,  1839, 
8vo  ;  and  that  of  Meineke,  Berlin,  1849,  &c.,  2  vols.  8vo. 

III.  COSMAS  (Ko<7>itts),1  commonly  called  INDICOPLEUSTES  (Indian  navi 
gator),  an  Egyptian  monk,  flourished  in  the  reign  of  Justinian,  about  A.D. 
535.  In  early  life  he  followed  the  employment  of  a  merchant,  and  visited 
many  foreign  countries,  such  as  Ethiopia,  Syria,  Arabia,  Persia,  and  al 
most  all  places  of  the  East.  Being  an  attentive  observer  of  every  thing 
that  met  his  eye,  he  carefully  registered  his  remarks  upon  the  scenes  and 
objects  which  presented  themselves.  But  a  migratory  life  became  irk 
some.  After  many  years  spent  in  this  manner,  he  bade  adieu  to  worldly 
occupations,  took  up  his  residence  in  a  monastery,  and  devoted  himself 
to  a  contemplative  life.  Here  he  composed  his  Toiroypcupia  Xpia-riaviK-f], 
Topographia  Christiana,  in  twelve  books.  The  last  book,  as  hitherto  pub 
lished,  is  imperfect  at  the  end.  The  object  of  the  treatise  is  to  show,  in 
opposition  to  the  universal  opinion  of  astronomers,  that  the  earth  is  not 
spherical,  but  an  extended  surface.  The  only  value  of  the  work  consists 
in  the  geographical  and  historical  information  which  it  contains.  Its 
author  describes  in  general,  with  great  accuracy,  the  situation  of  coun 
tries,  the  manners  of  their  people,  their  modes  of  commercial  intercourse, 
the  nature  and  properties  of  plants  and  animals,  and  many  other  particu 
lars  of  a  like  kind,  which  serve  to  throw  light  upon  the  Scriptures.  His 
diction  is  plain  and  familiar.  So  far  is  it  from  approaching  elegance  or 
elevation,  that  it  is  even  below  mediocrity.  He  did  not  aim  at  pompous 
or  polished  phraseology ;  and,  in  several  places,  he  modestly  acknowl 
edges  that  his  mode  of  expression  is  homely  and  inelegant. 

The  work  of  Cosmas  was  first  published  by  Montfaucon  from  a  MS.  of  the  tenth  cen 
tury,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  in  his  Collectio  Nova  Patrum  et  Scriptorum  Graecorum,  Paris, 
1706,  fol.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  113-346,  to  which  the  editor  prefixed  an  able  and  learned  preface. 
This  is  the  best  edition.  It  is  also  printed  in  the  Bibliotheca  Veterum  Patrum,  edited  by 
Gallandi,  Venice,  1765,  vol.  xi.,  p.  401,  seqq. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


568  GREEK     LITERATURE. 


CHAPTER  LXI. 

SEVENTH   OR    BYZANTINE   PERIOD— continued. 
MATHEMATICIANS. 

I.  DIOPHANTUS  (A.i6(pavTos*)S  of  Alexandrea,  is  the  only  Greek  writer  on 
Algebra.     His  period  is  wholly  unknown,  which  is  not  to  be  wondered 
at,  if  we  consider  that  he  stands  quite  alone  as  to  the  subject  which  hej 
treated.    But,  looking  at  the  improbability  of  all  mention  of  such  a  writer 
being  omitted  by  Proclus  and  Pappus,  modern  inquirers  have  felt  strong 
ly  inclined  to  place  him  toward  the  end  of  the  fifth  century  of  our  era  at 
the  earliest.     He  wrote  Arithmetica  ('ApjfyiTjTi/co),  in  thirteen  books,  of 
which  only  six  are  extant,  and  one  book,  De  Multangulis  Numeris,  on 
polygonal  numbers.    These  books  contain  a  system  of  reasoning  on  num 
bers  by  the  aid  of  general  symbols,  and  with  some  use  of  symbols  of 
operation  ;  so  that,  though  the  demonstrations  are  very  much  conducted 
in  words  at  length,  and  arranged  so  as  to  remind  us  of  Euclid,  there  is  no 
question  that  the  work  is  algebraical ;  not  a  treatise  on  algebra,  but  an 
algebraical  treatise  on  the  relations  of  integer  numbers,  and  on  the  solu 
tion  of  equations  of  more  than  one  variable  in  integers.     The  question 
whether  Diophantus  was  an  original  inventor,  or  whether  he  received  a 
hint  from  India,  the  only  country  we  know  of  which  could  then  have 
given  one,  is  of  great  difficulty.     The  very  great  similarity,  however,  of 
the  Diophantine  and  Hindu  algebra  (as  far  as  the  former  goes)  makes  it 
almost  certain  that  the  two  must  have  had  a  common  origin,  or  have 
come  one  from  the  other,  though  it  is  clear  that  Diophantus,  if  a  borrow 
er,  has  completely  recast  the  subject  by  the  introduction  of  Euclid's  form 
of  demonstration. 

The  first  Greek  edition,  with  Latin  version,  and  original  notes  (the  scholia  of  the 
monk  Maximus  Planudes  on  the  first  two  books  being  rejected  as  useless),  is  that  of 
Bachet  de  Meziriac,  Paris,  1621,  fol.  Fermat  left  materials  for  the  second  and  best  edi 
tion  (Greek  and  Latin),  in  which  is  preserved  all  that  was  good  in  Bachet,  and,  in  par 
ticular,  his  Latin  version,  with  most  valuable  comments  and  additions  of  his  own  (it 
being  peculiarly  his  subject). 

II.  PAPPUS  (nd-mros),"  of  Alexandrea,  one  of  the  later  Greek  geometers, 
is  said  by  Suidas  to  have  lived  under  Theodosius  (A.D.  379-395).     The 
writings  mentioned  as  having  come  from  the  pen  of  Pappus  are  as  fol 
lows  :  MaflTj/uemKttv  trwaywyw  fitp\ia,  the  celebrated  Mathematical  Collec 
tions.     This  work,  as  we  now  have  it  in  print,  consists  of  the  last  six  of 
eight  books.    Only  portions  of  these  books  have  been  published  in  Greek. 
2.  Xopoypatpia  olKOV^viK-i],      3.   Els  ra  reVtrapo  fiifi\ia  rov  Hro\ep.aiov  /u.ey<i- 
A.TJS   2wrc££ea>s    vTr6fjivr)p.a.,     4.    Flora/Hoi's   TOVS  Iv  Ai&vr).     5.    'OvtipoKpiriKa. 
The  last  four  have  not  reached  us.     They  are  mentioned  by  Suidas,  and 
just  as  here  written  down  in  continuous  quotation,  headed  fiifi\ia  Se  avrov. 

1  De  Morgan  i  Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  8.  v.  *  Id.  ib. 


BYZANTINE      PERIOD.  569 

There  are  two  Latin  editions  of  Pappus  :  the  first  by  Commandinus,  Pesaro,  1588,  fol., 
and  the  second  by  Manolessius,  Bologna,  1660,  fol.  There  is  also  a  small  portion  of  a 
short  comment  on  a  part  of  the  fifth  book  of  Ptolemy's  Syntaxis,  which  Theon  has  pre 
served  and  commented  on  (Synlaxis,  Basle,  1538,  p.  235,  of  Theon's  commentary).  This 
may  be  a  part  of  the  work  mentioned  by  us  as  No.  3  ;  for,  though  the  portion  in  question 
is  on  the  fifth  book,  yet  perhaps  the  four  books  mentioned  by  Suidas  are  not  the  first 
four  books. 

III.  THEON  (0eW),  the  younger,  so  called  to  distinguish  him  from  the 
elder  Theon,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Hadrian.    Theon  the  younger  was 
a  native  of  Alexandrea,  and  father  of  the  celebrated  Hypatia.    He  is  best 
known  as  an  astronomer  and  geometer,  and  lived  in  the  time  of  Theodo- 
sius  the  elder.    Both  Theons  were  heathens,  a  fact  which  the  date  of  the 
second  makes  it  desirable  to  state ;  and  each  held  the  Platonism  of  his 
period.     Of  Theon  of  Alexandrea  the  following  works  have  corne  down 
to  us  :  1.  Scholia  on  Aratus.    2.  An  edition  of  Euclid.    3.  A  Commentary 
on  the  Almagest  of  Ptolemy,  addressed  to  his  son  Epiphanius.     4.  A 
Commentary  on  the  Tables  of  Ptolemy. 

The  scholia  on  Aratus,  of  which  there  are  at  least  two  sets,  are  printed  in  the  editions 
of  that  poet.  In  like  manner,  the  commentary  on  the  Almagest  is  given  with  many  of  the 
editions  of  Ptolemy.  The  commentary  on  the  Tables  of  Ptolemy  was  published  by  Hal- 
ma,  in  three  parts,  1822-25,  4to,  Paris. 

IV.  HYPATIA  ('Trnma),1  a  lady  of  Alexandrea,  daughter  of  Theon,  by 
whom  she  was  instructed  in  philosophy  and  mathematics.     She  soon 
made  such  immense  progress  in  these  branches  of  knowledge,  that  she 
is  said  to  have  presided  over  the  Neo- Platonic  school  of  Plotinus  at  Alex 
andrea,  where  she  expounded  the  principles  of  his  system  to  a  numerous 
auditory.     She  appears  to  have  been  most  graceful,  modest,  and  beauti 
ful,  but  nevertheless  to  have  been  a  victim  to  slander  and  falsehood.    She 
was  accused  of  too  much  familiarity  with  Orestes,  prefect  of  Alexandrea, 
and  the  charge  spread  among  the  clergy,  who  took  up  the  notion  that  she 
interrupted  the  friendship  of  Orestes  with  their  archbishop  Cyril.     In 
consequence  of  this,  a  number  of  them,  at  whose  head  was  a  reader 
named  Peter,  seized  her  in  the  street,  and  dragged  her  from  her  chariot 
into  one  of  the  churches,  where  they  stripped  her  and  tore  her  to  pieces. 
Theodoret  accuses  Cyril  of  sanctioning  this  proceeding ;  but  Cave  holds 
this  to  be  incredible,  though  on  no  grounds  except  his  own  opinion  of 
Cyril's  general  character.    Synesius  valued  Hypatia  highly,  and  addressed 
to  her  several  letters.    Suidas  says  that  she  married  Isidorus,  and  wrote 
some  works  on  astronomy  and  other  subjects. 

V.  HERON  <*Hpwv)  the  younger,  so  called  to  distinguish  him  from  Heron 
of  Alexandrea,  already  mentioned,  is  supposed  to  have  lived  under  Her- 
aclius  (A.D.  610-641),    The  writings  attributed  to  him  are,  1.  De  Machinis 
Bellicis,  published  by  Barocius  (Latin),  Venice,  1572,  4to.     There  is  one 
Greek  manuscript  at  Bologna.     2.  Geodesia  (a  term  used  in  the  sense 
of  practical  geometry).     It  was  published  (Latin),  with  the  preceding,  by 
Barocius.     Montucla  notices  this  as  the  first  treatise  in  which  the  mode 
of  finding  the  area  of  a  triangle  by  means  of  its  sides  occurs.     3.  De  Ob- 
sidione  repellenda  ("Owus  \p$i  rbv  TTJS  TroAiop/coUjUeVrjs  Tr6\f<as 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


570  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

TV  iroXiopKiav  avTirda-a-fo-Oai),  published  (Greek)  in  the  Vet.  Mathemat.  Gr. 
Opera.  4.  TlapfKfio\al  £K  riav  ffrpartiyiKuv  Trapard^ecav.  This  treatise  ex 
ists  only  in  MS.  5.  'E«  TU>V  rov  "Hpwvos  TTfpl  TUV  TTJS  Teu^erpias  Kal  2re- 
peofj-crpias  bvop-druv,  published  (Greek  and  Latin)  with  the  first  book  of 
Euclid  by  Dasypodius,  Strasburg,  1671,  8vo.  6.  Excerpta  De  Mensuris 
(Greek  and  Latin),  in  the  Analecta  Graeca  of  the  Benedictines,  vol.  i., 
Paris,  1688,  4to.  7.  Elsaywyri  T&V  'yeu/j.frpov/j.fvwv,  existing  only  in  MS. 


CHAPTER  LXII. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD—  continued. 
COMPILERS. 


I.  JOANNES  STOB^EUS  ^Iwdvvrjs  6  SroySaioy)1  derived  his  surname  appar 
ently  from  being  a  native  of  Stobi,  in  Macedonia.  Of  his  personal  history 
we  know  nothing.  Even  the  age  in  which  he  lived  can  not  be  fixed  with 
accuracy,  but  he  must  have  been  later  than  Hierocles,  whom  he  quotes, 
and  who  flourished  as  a  Neo-Platonist  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  cen 
tury.  Probably  he  did  not  live  very  long  after  him,  as  he  quotes  no  writer 
of  a  later  date.  We  are  indebted  to  Stobaeus  for  a  very  valuable  collec 
tion  of  extracts  from  earlier  Greek  writers.  He  was  a  man  of  very  ex 
tensive  reading,  in  the  course  of  which  he  noted  down  the  most  interest 
ing  passages.  The  materials  which  he  had  collected  in  this  way  he  ar 
ranged  in  the  order  of  subjects,  for  the  use  of  his  son  Septimius.  This 
collection  of  extracts  has  come  down  to  us  divided  into  two  distinct  works, 
of  which  one  bears  the  title  of  'EK\oyal  <f>v<riKcu  5<a\e  termed  Kal  ijdiKal  (Ecloga 
Physica,  &c.),  and  the  other  the  title  of  *b.vQo\6ytov  (Florilegium  or  Ser 
mones).  The  Ecloga  consist,  for  the  most  part,  of  extracts  conveying  the 
views  of  earlier  poets  and  prose  writers  on  points  of  physics,  dialectics, 
and  ethics.  The  Florilegium,  or  Sermones,  is  devoted  to  subjects  of  a 
moral,  political,  and  economical  nature,  and  maxims  of  practical  wisdom. 
Each  chapter  of  the  Edoga  and  Sermones  is  headed  by  a  title  describing 
its  matter.  The  extracts  quoted  in  illustration  begin  usually  with  passa 
ges  from  the  poets,  after  whom  come  historians,  orators,  philosophers, 
and  physicians.  To  Stobaeus  we  are  indebted  for  a  large  proportion  of 
the  fragments  that  remain  of  the  lost  works  of  the  poets.  Euripides 
seems  to  have  been  an  especial  favorite  with  him.  He  has  quoted  above 
five  hundred  passages  from  him  in  the  Sermones,  one  hundred  and  fifty 
from  Sophocles,  and  about  two  hundred  from  Menander.  In  extracting 
from  prose  writers  Stobaeus  sometimes  quotes  verbatim,  sometimes  gives 
only  an  epitome  of  the  passage.  Photius  has  given  an  alphabetical  list 
of  above  five  hundred  Greek  writers  from  whom  Stobaeus  has  made  ex 
tracts,  the  works  of  the  greater  part  of  whom  have  perished. 

The  best  editions  of  the  Eclogae  are  by  Heeren,  Gottingen,  1792-1801,  4  vols.  8vo,  and 
by  Gaisford,  Oxford,  1850-51,  2  vols.  8vo.  The  best  edition  of  the  Florilegium  is  by 
Gaisford,  Oxford,  1822,  4  vols.  8vo  ;  reprinted,  Leipzig,  1823,  4  vols.  8vo. 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  571 

II.  CASSIANUS  BASSUS/  surnamed  Scholasticus,  was  in  all  probability  the 
compiler  of  the  Geoponica  (rewTtwt/ca),  or  work  on  agriculture,  which  is 
usually  ascribed  to  the  Emperor  Constantine  Porphyrogennetus.  Cassi- 
anus  Bassus  appears  to  have  compiled  it  by  the  command  of  this  emper 
or,  who  has  thus  obtained  the  honor  of  the  work.  Of  Bassus  we  know 
nothing,  save  that  he  lived  at  Constantinople,  and  had  been  born  at  Mara- 
tonymum,  probably  a  place  in  Bithynia.  The  work  itself,  which  is  still 
extant,  consists  of  twenty  books,  and  is  compiled  from  various  authors, 
whose  names  are  always  given.  Bassus  has  contributed  only  two  short 
extracts  of  his  own,  namely,  chapters  five  and  thirty-six  of  the  fifth  book. 
The  various  subjects  treated  of  in  the  Geoponica  will  best  appear  from 
the  contents  of  the  different  books,  which  are  as  follows :  1.  Of  the  at 
mosphere,  and  of  the  rising  and  setting  of  the  stars.  2.  Of  general 
matters  appertaining  to  agriculture,  and  of  the  different  kinds  of  corn. 
3.  Of  the  various  agricultural  duties  suitable  to  each  month.  4  and  5. 
Of  the  cultivation  of  the  vine.  6-8.  Of  the  making  of  wine.  9.  Of  the 
cultivation  of  the  olive  and  the  making  of  oil.  10-12.  Of  horticulture. 
13.  Of  the  animals  and  insects  injurious  to  plants.  14.  Of  pigeons  and 
other  birds.  15.  Of  natural  sympathies  and  antipathies,  and  of  the  man 
agement  of  bees.  16.  Of  horses,  asses,  and  camels.  17.  Of  the  breed 
ing  of  cattle.  18.  Of  the  breeding  of  sheep.  19.  Of  dogs,  hares,  deer, 
pigs,  and  of  salting  meat.  20.  Of  fishes. 
The  best  edition  of  the  Geoponica  is  that  by  Niclas,  Leipzig,  1781,  4  vols.  (in  one)  8vo. 


CHAPTER  LXIII. 

SEVENTH  OR  BYZANTINE  PERIOD— concluded. 
MEDICAL     WRITERS.2 

I.  MEDICAL  science  made  very  little  progress  during  this  long  period. 
Alexandrea  continued  to  be  the  seat  of  the  theory  of  the  art,  while  Rome 
and  Constantinople  furnished  to  those  who  exercised  it  an  extended  prac 
tice  and  enlarged  experience.   -The  science  of  medicine,  however,  could 
hardly  be  said  to  exist  in  its  true  character,  requiring,  as  it  always  does, 
a  scrupulous  observation  of  nature,  and  a  philosophic  spirit  to  pursue 
such  investigations,  both  of  which  were  in  a  great  measure  checked  by 
the  superstition  which  exercised  so  powerful  an  influence  during  the 
greater  part  of  the  period  under  review. 

II.  If,  therefore,  during  this  long  interval  of  comparative  darkness, 
there  existed  any  follower  of  the  medical  art  who  had  raised  himself 
above  the  ordinary  level,  in  place  of  extending  the  circle  of  human  knowl 
edge  by  new  discoveries,  he  contented  himself  with  commenting  on  the 
works  of  Galen,  and  of  other  medical  writers  anterior  to  him.    Such  phy 
sicians  formed  what  was  called  the  School  of  Galen.    The  principles  which 
they  followed  were  derived  in  part  from  the  Dogmatic,  in  part  from  the 
Methodic  and  Empiric  sects  ;  for,  in  imitation  of  some  of  the  philosophers 

1  Smith,  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Scholl,  Hist.  Lit.  Gr.,  vol.  vii.,  p.  247. 


572  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

of  the  day,  they  laid  claim  to  the  name  of  Eclectics.  We  will  give  a  brief 
account  of  the  most  remarkable  among  them,  and  principally  of  those 
whose  works  have  come  down  to  us.1 

III.  ORIBASIUS  ('Opfifidfftos  or  'Opi&d<rios)a  was  born  about  A.D.  325,  either 
at  Sardis,  in  Lydia,  or  at  Pergamum,  in  Mysia.  He  early  acquired  a 
great  professional  reputation.  Oribasius  was  an  intimate  friend  of  the 
Emperor  Julian,  with  whom  he  became  acquainted  several  years  before 
his  accession  to  the  throne.  He  was  almost  the  only  person  to  whom 
Julian  imparted  the  secret  of  his  apostasy  from  Christianity.  He  was 
appointed  by  the  emperor,  soon  after  his  accession,  quaestor  of  Constan 
tinople,  and  sent  to  Delphi  to  endeavor  to  restore  the  oracle  of  Apollo  to 
its  former  splendor  and  authority ;  but  in  this  mission  he  failed,  as  the 
only  answer  he  brought  back  was  that  the  oracle  was  no  more.  Oriba 
sius  accompanied  Julian  in  his  expedition  against  Persia,  and  was  with 
him  at  the  time  of  his  death.  The  succeeding  emperors,  Valentinian 
and  Valens,  wTere  not  so  favorably  disposed  toward  him,  but  confiscated 
his  property  and  banished  him.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  his  exile 
did  not  last  long,  and  that  it  ended  before  the  year  369.  Of  the  personal 
character  of  Oribasius  we  know  little  or  nothing,  but  it  is  clear  that  he 
was  much  attached  to  paganism  and  to  the  heathen  philosophy.  He  was 
an  intimate  friend  of  Eunapius,  who  praises  him  very  highly,  and  wrote 
an  account  of  his  life.  We  possess  at  present  three  works  of  Oribasius, 
which  are  generally  considered  to  be  genuine.  The  first  of  these  is  called 
'Swayaryai  'larpiKai,  Collecta  Medicinalia,  or  sometimes  'E^So^Kovrdfti^Xos,  9 
and  is  the  work  that  was  compiled  at  the  command  of  Julian,  when  Ori 
basius  was  still  a  young  man.  It  contains  little  original  matter,  but  is 
very  valuable  on  account  of  the  numerous  extracts  from  writers  whose 
works  are  no  longer  extant.  More  than  half  of  this  work  is  now  lost,  and 
what  remains  is  in  some  confusion,  so  that  it  is  not  easy  to  specify  ex 
actly  how  many  books  are  at  present  actually  in  existence ;  it  is  be 
lieved,  however,  that  we  possess  twenty-five,  with  fragments  of  two  oth 
ers. 

The  second  work  of  Oribasius  that  is  still  extant  was  written  probably 
about  thirty  years  after  the  above,  of  which  it  is  an  abridgment  (Swings). 
It  consists  of  nine  books.  This  work  has  never  been  published  in  Greek, 
but  was  translated  into  Latin  by  Rasarius,  and  printed  at  Venice,  1554, 
8vo.  The  third  work  of  Oribasius  is  entitled  Ewr^piffra,  Euporista  or  De 
facile  parabilibus,  and  consists  of  four  books.  Both  this  and  the  preceding 
work  were  intended  as  manuals  of  medicine. 

There  is  no  complete  edition  of  the  first  of  the  above-mentioned  works.  The  first  fif 
teen  books  were  first  published  in  a  Latin  translation  by  Rasarius  (together  with  the 
twenty-fourth  and  twenty-firth),  Venice,  8vo,  without  date,  but  before  1555.  They  were 
published  in  Greek  and  Latin  by  C.  F.  Matthaei,  Moscow,  1808,  4to,  but  with  the  omis 
sion  of  all  the  extracts  from  Galen,  Rufus  Ephesius,  and  Dioscorides.  This  edition  is 
very  scarce.  The  first  and  second  books  had  been  previously  published  in  Greek  and 
Latin  by  Gruner,  Jena,  1782,  4to.  Books  twenty-one  and  twenty-two  were  discovered 
in  MS.  by  Dietz,  about  fifteen  years  ago,  but  have  not  yet  been  published  either  in  Greek 
or  Latin.  Book  forty-four  was  published  in  Greek  and  Latin,  with  copious  notes,  by 

1  Scholl,  1.  c.  a  Gremhill;  Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v. 


BYZANTINE     PERIOD.  573 

Bussemaker,  Groningen,  1835,  8vo,  having  previously  appeared  in  Greek,  together  with 
some  other  books,  in  Mai's  Classici  Auctores  e  Vaticanis  Codicibus  editi,  Rome,  1831,  8vo. 


IV.  AETIUS  ('AtTios),1  a  Greek  medical  writer,  born  at  Amida,  in  Meso 
potamia,  and  who  lived  at  the  end  of  the  fifth,  or  the  beginning  of  the 
sixth  century  after  Christ.     His  work,  entitled  Bj/3A/a  'larpiKa  'E/c/ca/Se/ca, 
"  Sixteen  Books  on  Medicine,"  is  one  of  the  most  valuable  medical  re 
mains  of  antiquity,  as  being  a  judicious  compilation  from  many  authors 
whose  works  are  lost.    The  whole  of  it  has  never  appeared  in  the  original 
Greek.     One  half  was  published  at  Venice,  from  the  Aldine  press,  1534, 
fol.  ;  the  second  volume  never  appeared.    Different  parts  have  been  pub 
lished  at  different  times,  of  which  we  may  mention,  some  chapters  of  the 
ninth  book,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  by  Hebenstreit,  Leipzig,  1757,  4to  ;  anoth 
er  chapter  of  the  same  book,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  by  Tengstrom,  Abo,  1817, 
4to  ;  and  another  extract  from  the  same  book,  in  the  2u\Ao7?;  'EAATJJ/I/CWJ/ 
avfKS6Td>v  of  Mustoxydes  and  Schinas,  Venice,  1816,  8vo.     There  is  a 
corrupt  translation  of  the  whole  work  into  Latin,  by  Cornarius,  Basle, 
1542,  often  reprinted. 

V.  ALEXANDER  TRALLiANus,2  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  the  ancient 
physicians,  was  born  at  Tralles,  in  Lydia,  whence  he  derived  his  surname. 
His  date  may  be  safely  put  in  the  sixth  century  after  Christ.     He  was  a 
man  of  extensive  practice,  of  very  great  experience,  and  of  distinguished 
reputation,  not  only  at  Rome,  but  wherever  he  travelled  in  Spain,  Gaul, 
and  Italy,  whence  he  was  called,  by  way  of  eminence,  "  Alexander  the 
Physician."     He  is  not  a  mere  compiler,  like  Aetius,  Oribasius,  and  oth 
ers,  but  has  more  the  air  of  an  original  writer.     He  was  the  author  of 
two  extant  Greek  works,  1.  Bt/J\ia  'larpiKa  AuoKtuSe/ca,  Libri  Duodecim  de 
Re  Medico  ;  and,  2.  Uepl  'EX^ivQuv,  DC  Lumbricis.    He  seems  to  have  writ 
ten  several  other  medical  works,  which  are  now  lost. 

The.  work  De  Re  Medico,  was  first  edited  in  Greek  by  Goupylus,  Paris,  1548,  fol.,  a 
beautiful  and  scarce  edition.  It  was  published  in  Greek,  with  a  Latin  translation,  by  J. 
Guinterus  Andernacus,  Basle,  1556,  8vo,  which  is  a  rare  and  valuable  edition.  The 
other  extant  work,  De  Lumbricis,  was  first  published  in  Greek  and  Latin  by  Mercurialis, 
Venice,  1570,  4to.  It  is  also  inserted  in  his  work  De  morbis  puerorum,  Frankfort,  1584, 
8vo,  and  in  the  twelfth  volume  of  the  old  edition  of  Fabricius'  Bibliotheca  Gr&ca. 

VI.  PAULUS  JSoiNETA,3  a  celebrated  medical  writer,  of  whose  personal 
history  nothing  is  known,  except  that  he  was  born  in  the  island  of  JEgina, 
and  that  he  travelled  a  good  deal,  visiting,  among  other  places,  Alexan- 
drea.     He  probably  lived  in  the  latter  half  of  the  seventh  century  after 
Christ.     Suidas  says  he  wrote  several  medical  works,  of  which  the  prin 
cipal  one  is  still  extant,  with  no  exact  title,  but  commonly  called  De  Re 
Medico,  Libri  Septem.     This  work  is  chiefly  a  compilation  from  former 
writers.     The  sixth  book  is  the  most  valuable  and  interesting,  and  con 
tains,  at  the  same  time,  the  most  original  matter.     His  reputation  among 
the  Arabian  writers  seems  to  have  been  very  great. 

The  Greek  text  has  been  twice  published,  Venice,  1528,  and  Basle,  1538.  There  is  an 
excellent  English  translation  by  Adams,  London,  1844-47,  3  vols.  8vo. 

VII.  THEOPHILUS  PROTOSPATHARIUS,*  the  author  of  several  Greek  medi 
cal  works,  which  are  still  extant,  lived  probably  in  the  seventh  century 

1  Greenhill  ;  Smith's  Diet.  Biogr.,  s.  v.  2  Id.  ib.  3  Id.  ib.  *  Id.  ib. 


574  GREEK     LITERATURE. 

after  Christ.  Protospatharius  was  originally  a  military  title,  given  to  the 
colonel  of  the  body-guards  of  the  Emperor  of  Constantinople  (Spatharii), 
but  afterward  became  also  a  high  civil  dignity.  After  arriving  at  high 
professional  and  political  rank,  he  at  last  embraced  the  monastic  life.  Of 
his  works,  the  two  most  important  are,  1.  Tlepl  TTJS  rov  a.v6p&nov  Kara.- 
a-Kevys,  De  corporis  humani  fabrica,  an  anatomical  and  physical  treatise,  in 
five  books,  the  best  edition  of  which  is  by  Greenhill,  Oxford,  1842,  8vo  ; 
and,  2.  Uepl  ovpuv,  De  Urinis,  the  best  edition  of  which  is  by  Guidot,  Ley- 
den,  1703  (and  1731),  8vo. 


INDEX  OF  PROPER  NAMES. 


A.  Page 

Abydenus 386 

Achseus 195 

Achilles  Tatius 546 

Acominatua  v.  Nicetas. 
Acropolita  v.  Georgius. 

Acusilaus 143 

Adonis,  the 16 

Adrianus 475 

jEantides 382 

^Egineta  v.  Paulus. 

^Elianus  Claudius 468 

Tacticus 522 

-Snesideraus 507 

Machines 278 

Socraticua 305 

.fischylus 176 

^Esculapiua 353 

^Esopus 91 

Aetius 573 

Africanus,  Sextus  Julius 470 

Agathias 82,  561 

Agathon 196 

Agias 59 

Albinus 506 

Alcasus 106 

Alcetas 81 

Alcinous 506 

Alciphron 489 

Alcman 116 

Alexander  ^Egasus 505 

^Etolua 381 

Aphrodisiensis 505,  534 

Trallianus 573 

Alexis 222 

Comnenus 565 

Alpheus 443 

Alypius 523 

Ammianus 444 

Atnmonius,  Alexandrinus 414 

(Grammaticus) 552 

Saccas 511 

Anacreon 112 

Anagnostes  v.  Joannes. 

Ananius 90 

Anatolius 518 

Anaxagoras 135 

Anaxandrides 221 


Page 

Anaxilaus 506 

Anaximander 132 

Anaximenes 133 

(of  Lampeacus) 254 

Andocides 271 

Androsthenes 258 

Anna  Comnena 562 

Anthology,  Greek 80 

Antimachua  (of  Colophon) 228 

(ofTeos) 67 

Antiochus . .  406 

Antipater  (of  Sidon) 442 

(of  Thessalonica) 443 

Antiphanes 221 

Antiphilus 443 

Antiphon 269 

Antisthenes 324 

Antoninus,  M.  Aurelius 504 

Liberalia...  ..  499 


Antonius  Diogenes 487 

Apellas  Ponticua 81 

Aphthonius 484 

Apion 55,  495 

Apollinarius 537 

Apollodorus  (Comicus) 227 

(Damascenus) 522 

(Grammaticus) 371,  396 

Apollonius  Dyscolus 497 

Pergams 426 

Rhodius 364 

Tyaneua 506 

Sophista 55,492 

Appianus 464 

Apsines 486 

Araros 22C 

Aratua 367 

(ofSicyon) 390 

Arcadius 498 

Arcesilaus 403 

Archagathus 529 

Archelaus 136 

Archilochua 73,  86 

Archimedea 420 

Archytas 352 

Arctinus 58 

Aretseus 531 

Arion 119,  157 


576 


INDEX     OF     PROPER     NAMES. 


Page 

Aristarchus 55,  412 

Samius 429 

(of  Tegea) 195 

Aristaenetus 489 

Aristeas 68 

Aristides,  JSlius 475 

(Scriptor  Eroticus) 487 

Quintilianus 524 

Aristippus 308 

Aristobulus 256 

Aristodemus 81 

Aristonicus 496 

Aristophanes 212 

Byzantinus 55,  411 

Aristoteles 327 

Aristoxenus 202 

Arrianus 462,  522 

Artemidorus 535 

(Grammaticus) 416 

Asclepiades 529 

Asclepigenia 515 

Asius 67 

Astydnmas 197 

Athenaeus 500 

(Mathematicus) 433 

Athenodorus...  ..  503 


Babrius 92 

Bacchius 524 

Bacchylides 123 

Barton 254,259 

Basilius 545 

Bassus  v.  Cassianus. 

Berosus 385 

Besantinus 376 

Bion 379 

Biton 433 

Bormus 16 

Bryennius  v.  Nicephorua. 

Byzantine  Historians 560 

C. 

Cadmus 143 

Callimachua 374 

Callinus 72 

Callisthenes 255 

Callistratus 103 

Cameniata  v.  Joannes. 

Cananus  v.  Joannes. 

Cantacuzenus,  Joannes.  562 

Carcinua 195 

Carneades 404 

Cassianus  Bassus 571 

Castor 450 

Cebes 307 

Cedrenus  v.  Georgius. 

Celaus  ..  -.502 


Page 

ChsBreraon 198 

•  JEgyptius 503 

Chares 257 

Chariton 547 

Charon...  ..   144 


Chionides 202 

Choerilus 174 

(of  lasos) 231 

Samius...  -.  230 


Chronicon  Paschale 563 

Chrysippus 345 

Chrysothemis 18 

Cinajthon 66 

Cinnamus  v.  Joannes. 

Cleanthes 344 

Clearchus 487 

Clemens  Alexandrinus 509 

Clitarchus 255 

Clitomacbus 405 

Codinus  v.  Georgius. 

Coluthus 538 

Comnena  v.  Anna. 

Coney  lus 48 

Conon 428 

(Mythographus) 499 


Constantinus  Cephalas 82 

Manasses 564 

: Porphyrogenitus 561 

Psellus 539 

Corax 267 

Corinna 125 

Cosmas  Indicopleustes 567 

Crates 209 

(Grammaticus) 55,415 

Cratinus 208 

Cratippus 505 

Crinagoras 443 

Ctesias 246 

Ctesibiua 432 

D. 

Daimachus 400 

Damascius 516 

Deimachus 400 

Demetrius  (of  Adramyttium) 497 

Phalereus 409 

(of  Scepsis) 414 

Triclinius 551 

IJemocritus 295 

Demosthenes 283 

Dexippus 469 

Dicajarchus 397 

Didymus  (Grammaticus) 55,  417,  495 

Dinarchus 292 

Dinolochus 219 

Diodes  (of  Carystus) 435 

(of  Peparethus) 388 

Diodorus...  ..  452 


INDEX     OF     PROPER     NAMES. 


577 


Page 

Diodotus 254,259 

Diogenes  Apolloniates 136 

Babylonius 407 

*  Laertius 81,  445,  503 

(of  Sinope) 326 

Diogenianus 81,  552 

Diognetus 254,  259 

Dion  Cassius 465 

Chrysostomus 472 

Dionysius  (of  Halicarnassus) 453,  481 

Periegetes 445 

(of  Syracuse) 197 

, Thrax 415 

Diophantus 568 

Pioscorides 530 

Diphilus 226 

Diyllus 253 

Dosiadas 376 

Dositheus 498 

Draco  (Grammaticus) 497 

(Medicus) 354 

Ducas  v.  Joannes. 


Page 
Euxcnus : 505 

G. 

Galenus 532 

Gaudentius 523 

Genesius 562 

Geoponica 571 

Georgius  Acropolita 562 

Cedrenus 564 

Codinus 565 

Hamartolus 563 

Lecapenus 556 

Monachus 563 

Pachymeres 562 

Phranza 563 

Pisides 539 

Syncellus 563 

Gnesippus 202 

Gorgias 267,  298 

Gregorius  Corinthus 555 


Empedoclea 138 

Epaphroditus 496 

Ephippus 258 

Ephorus 252 

Eph  nt'in  ius 564 

Epicharmus 218 

Epictetus 503 

Epicurus 347 

Epimenides 68 

Erasistratus 437 

Eratosthenes 400,  430 

Erinna Ill 

Etymologicum  Magnum 490 

Eubulus 220 

Euclides  (of  Alexandrea) 419 

(of  Megara) 311 

Eudocia 557 

Eudoxus 352 

Eugamon 60 

Euhemerus 81 

Eumelus 86 

Eumenes 254,259  | 

Eumolpidae 19  i 

Eumolpus 19 

Eunnpius 558 

Euphorion 366 

(Tragicus) 197 

Euphrates 503 

Eupolis 211  I 

Euripides 188  ' 

Junior 198  ' 

Eusebius 557  j 

Eustathius 550  ; 

(Mytbog.) 548  [ 

B 


Hanno 259 

Harpocration 551 

Hecatseus  (of  Miletus) 144 

(of  Abdera) 384 

Hegemon 210 

Hegesias 409 

Heliodorus 546 

Hellanicus 145 

Hephsestion 498 

Heraclides 438 

Heraclitus 133 

Hermesianax 373 

Hermogenes 483 

Hermolaus 566 

Herodes  Atticus 474 

Herodotus 147 

Herodianus 467 

,Elius 493,498 

Heron 432 

(Junior) 569 

Herophilus 436 

(Medicus) 355 


Hesiod 

Hesychius 552 

(of  Miletus) 564 

Hierocles 565 

Himerius 544 

Hipparchus 431 

Hippias 298 

Hippocrates  (of  Chios) 351 

(of  Cos) 354 

Hippolytus 564 

Hipponax , 89 

Homerus 26 

,  Iliad 28 

,  Odyssey 29 


578 


INDEX     OF     PROPER     NAMES. 


Page 

Homeric  Hymns 51 

Homerus  (Tragicus) 382 

Hyagnis 22 

Hy  brias 103 

Hylas 16 

Hymenajus - 17 

Hypatia 569 

Hyperechius 553 

Hyperides 291 

Hypsiclea 519 


lalemus 16 

lamblichus 514 

Syrius 488 

Ibycus 120 

Ion 194 

lophon 197 

Isaac  Tzetzes 541 

Isreus 277 

Isidorus  (of  Charax) 527 

(of  Gaza) 516 

Isocrates 274 

later 391 

J. 

Joannes  Anagnostes 563 

Cameniata 562 

,       Cananus 563 

Cinnamus 562 

Constantinus 562 

Ducas 562 

(of  Epiphanea) 561 

(of  Jerusalem) 'Sfil 

Laurentius  or  Lydus 564 

MulHlas 563 

Scylitzes 563 

(of  Sicily) 563 

Stobams 570 

Tzetzes 540 

Zonaras 554,  560 

Joel 564 

Josephus 457 

Juba 451 

Julianus,  Flavius  Claudius 537,  544 

Julius  Pollux 493 

(Byzantinus) 564 

Justinus 509 

L. 

Laonicus  Chalcondyles 560 

Lasus 123 

Leo  Diaconus 562 

Grammaticus . . , 563 

Leonidas 444 

Leontius  (Byzantinus) . .  562 

Lesbonax 472 

Leschea 59 


Fags 

Leucippus 294 

Libanius 542 

Linus 16 

Lityerses 16 

Longinus 485 

Longus 547 


Lucianus 477 

Lucillius 443 

Lucius  (of  Patrat!) 487 

Lycomidaj 19 

Lycophron 382 

Lycurgus 282 

Lysias 272 

M. 

Machaon 353 

Magnes 203 

Maneros 16 

Manetho 386 

Manuel  Palseologus 565 

Philes  (or  Phile) 541 

Marcellus  Sidetes •. 448 

Marcianus  (of  Heraclea) 556 

Marinus 516 

(of  Tyre) 528 

Marsyas 22 

(Historicus) 258 

Mtttthajus  Blastares 565 

Maximus  Tyrius 480 

Medius 258 

Megasthenes 399 

Meleager 81,  442 

Melinno 376 

Memnon 456 

Menander 224 

(Protector) 561 

Menedemus 313 

Menelaus 519 

Menetor 81 

Mesomedes 444 

Melon 351 

Metrodorus 350 

Michael  Psellus 562 

Glykas 564 

Mimnermus 74 

Moderatus 506 

Mceris 492 

Morsimus 197 

Moschus 380 

Musasus 19 

Grammaticus 538 

N. 

Nearchus 257 

Neophron 193 

Neoptolemus 81 

Nestor 444 

Nicander 3& 


INDEX     OF     PROPER     NAMES. 


579 


Page 

Nicanor 498 

Nicephorus  Bryennius 562 

(of  Constantinople) 563 

Gregoras 560 

Nieetas  Acominatus 560 

Nicolaus  Chalcondyles 560 

Damascenus 455 

Nicomachus 506 

Nicostratus 221 

Nonnus 537 

Numenius 509 

O. 

Olen 18 

Olympiodorus 559 

Olympus 22 

95 

Onesicritus 256 

Onomacritus 20,  48 

Onosander 521 

Oppianus 446 

Oribasius 572 

Origenes 510 

Orion 491 

Orpheus 20 

(of  Crotona) 48 


P. 
Palaeologus  v.  Manuel. 

Paltjephatus 

Palladas 

Pnmphila 

Pamphilus 

Pamphos 

Panaetius 

Pnnyaeis 

Pappus 

Pannenides 

Paulus  JSgineta 

Silentiarius 537, 

Pausanias  

Pericles 

Phaedon 

Phanocles 

Phemius 

Pherecrates 

Pherecydes 


265 


Page 

Philo 406 

Philo  Byzantinus 434 

Judttus 508 

Philochorus 81 

Philocles 197 

Philodemus 442 

Philonides 217 

Philostratus 481 

Phlegon 469 

Phocylides 77 

Phormis 217 

Photius 553,  556 

Phrynichus 175 

Comicus 210 

Grammaticus  ...  . .  492 


Historicus 


Philammon 

Philemon 

(Lexicographus) 

Philetajrus 

Philetas 

Philinus 

Philippides 

Philippus 81, 

Philiscua 

Philiscus 


Phrynis 95 

Phylarchus 390 

Pigres 52 

Piudarus 124 

Pisandur 67 

Pisistratus 47,  50 

Planudes 83 

Plato 314 

Comicus 216 

Plotinus 512 

Plutarchus 4GQ 

Podalirius 353 

Polemo 324 

Periegetes 81,  402 

Sophista 473 

Polyeenus 522 

Polybius 391 

Polybus 354 

Porphyrius 513 

Posidippus 227 

Posidonius 408 

Pratinas 159,  173 

Praxagoras  (of  Athens) 558 

(of  Cos) 436 

Pnwresius 545 

Proclus 514 

Procopius 560,  564 

312     Prodicus 298 

373     Protagoras 298 

27     Ptolemteus  Alexandrinus 496 

216  j Chermus 499 

131  j Claudius 519,  524,  528 

144  j Euergetes 495 

18  | Soter 255,  361 

Pyrrho 346 

Pythagoras 139 

Pytheas , ,  261 


222  i 

55:3 

891 

372 

4,38 


Q. 
Quintus  Smyrnfflus 449 


381 

248  i  Rhianua 364 


580 


INDEX     OF     PROPER     NAMES. 


Page 

Rhinthon 384 


Sappho 108 

Scylax 260 

Scy  mnus 371 

Serapion 438 

Serenus 518 

Sextus  Empiricus 507 

Silentiarius  v.  Paulus. 

Simeon  Metaphrastes 564 

Simmias 376 

Simocatta  v.  Theophylactus. 

Simon 242 

Socraticus 307 

Simonides  (of  Amorgos) 74,  88 

(of  Ceos) 78,  80,  121 

Simplicius 516 

Socrates 300 

Solon 75,  88 

Sophocles 183 

Junior 198 

Sophron 219 

Soranus 531 

Sosibius 417 

Sosiphanes 382 

Sositheus 382 

Speusippus 323 

Stasinus 58 

Stephanus  Byzantinus 566 

Stesichorus 117 

Stilpon 312 

Stobseus 570 

Strabo 525 

Straton 340 

(of  Sardis) 81,  445 

Suidas 554 

Susarion 201 

Syrianus 550 

T. 

Terpnnder 94 

Thales  (of  Miletus) 131 

Thales  or  Thaletas 96,  100 

Thamyris 23 

Thebais 60 

Themison 531 

Themistius 542 

Theocritus 377 

Theodectes 199 

Theodorus 351 

Prodromus 540 

Theodosius 519 

(ofMelite) 564 


Page 

(of  Syracuse) 561 

Theognia :     76 

Theon  (Grammaticus) 490 

(of  Smyrna) 506 

(the  Younger) 569 

Theophanes 450 

Isaacius 563 

Theophilus  Protospatharius 573 

Theophrastus 339 

Theophylactus  Simocatta 561 

(of  Achris) 565 

Theopompus 251 

Thespis 158 

Thessalus 531 

(Medicus) 354 

Thomas  Magister 555 

Thrasyllus 506 

Threnus,  the 17 

Thucydides 231 

Timaeus 389 

Sophists 493 

Timagenes 451 

Timocreon 124 

Timon 346 

Timosthenes 400 

Tisias 267 

Tricha 549 

Tryphiodorus 538 

Tryphon 491 

Tyrtseus 72 

Tzetzes,  Isaac 541 

,  Joannes 540 

U. 
Ulpianus 541 

X. 

Xanthus 146 

Xenarchus 505 

Xenocrates 323 

Xenodamus 100 

Xenophanee 78,  137 

Xenophon 237 

Ephesins 488 


Zeno  (the  Eleatic) 138 

(the  Stoic) 341 

Zenodotus 55,  411 

(Philosophus) 516 

Zonaras  Joannes 554,  560 

Zopyrus 48 

Zosimus 559 


THE    END 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 
|R  PQ  pon  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
KenewraTOo£$ia)re  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


LD  21A-607n-7,'66 
(G4427slO)476B 


T 


M300635 

PA305I 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


